Unbelievable. This pointless referendum on whether or not smacking children should be criminialised is going to cost $9 million. Truly, it would be hard to find a bigger waste of money.
Lets be clear about the background to this. Until June 2007, section 59 of the Crimes Act said:
Every parent of a child is justified in using force by way of correction towards the child, if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances.
Unfortunately, this allowed parents to escape prosecution after giving their chidren a range of beatings, including with horsewhips and electric cables.
Now the Act says (to summarise):
(1) Every parent of a child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—
(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or
(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or
(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or
(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.
(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.
So, I can’t hit my child for the purpose of correction. But if I do, and the police catch me, but believe it is an inconsequential offence, they don’t have to prosecute me.
So far, I’m not exactly quaking in my boots. If I smack Lulu or Madeleine and a policeman happens to be wandering past and sees me, I honestly believe the odds of me spending time in a police cell are precisely zero. Why? Because I’d only ever be giving them a small smack on the hand, in a case of extreme naughtyness that no amount of reasoning or other rational parenting method could cure. The smack and the consequent reaction would be over in 60 seconds and life would go on as normal, probably before PC Plod had his notebook out.
At the time section 59 was amended, all manner of loopy child-beater apologists jumped up and down and whined about the “nanny state” eroding their “right” to smack their children whenever they felt like it, raised the ridiculous spectre of good and honest parents being banged up for simply giving little Johnny a smack on the bum, and predicted the end of the world as we know it.
Thankfully, for once, good sense prevailed in Parliament and a decent law was passed. It is no longer ok to thump your children, and I’m sure that no-one in their right mind would argue with that. Moreover, the police are not obliged to go around arresting every parent they see smacking their child. This allows some discretion and commonsense to be used. If a child is being given a mighty walloping, that is not “inconsequential”. A small smack on the hand obviously is.
So far as I’m aware, the sky has not fallen and no-one has been successfully (or even unsuccessfully) prosecuted for smacking their child in circumstances that have raised any controversy at all.
Back to the referendum.
A bunch of confused and misguided citizens initiated a referundum, which poses the question:
“Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”
What a stupid question. No-one really thinks a small smack delievered in appropriate circumstances should be a criminal offense, but drawing such a clear line in the sand, as section 59 now does, makes it far harder for bad people to get away with hurting defenceless children. Thats just the way it is.
Here are some more questions:
Should it be ok to beat your child?
What do you think about people who beat their children with horsewhips or electric cables and get away with it?
Are you really concerned that you’ll be arrested for giving your child a small smack?
If you are giving your child more than a small smack, why?
If you really want to examine the effectiveness of this law, why don’t you ask the question: “Has the amendment to section 59 worked? Has anyone escaped conviction for assaulting their child since section 59 was amended?”
The rederendum will tell us nothing. Voting “yes” might mean you think a smack as part of good parental correction should be a criminal offence. But it might also means that you just hate the idea of any form of corporal punishment being sanctioned by the law.
Voting no may mean you’re genuinely afraid that your rights as a parent have been violeted by section 59. I’d advise you to just relax and get on with parenting perhaps with less smacking, so you’ve got less to worry about.
Alternatively, you genuinely want to smack your children as much as you like. In which case I’ve got no time or advice for you and I’m awfully relieved to say that the law is unlikely to change anyway. Go and pick on someone your own size.
