MENZ Issues: news and discussion about New Zealand men, fathers, family law, divorce, courts, protests, gender politics, and male health.

Swedish parents pay for nanny state failures

Filed under: General — Vman @ 4:40 pm Sat 13th February 2010

Sweden made it a crime for parents to smack their children. Now youth crime is climbing at an alarming rate. Their government’s response is that as of September parents will pay the financial consequences of their children’s crimes.

Read about it here:


  1. The comments are interesting.

    So which parent will be paying ….. the mother who in over 70% of divorced cases have residential custody of the children from Day 1 of the divorce or the father because it is always his fault that the children are naughty?

    And this one

    How can you implement such law when the state disallows a strict discpline? Surely discipline and responsibility goes hand in hand. Does this mean we can conclude that the state is saying “kids go to what ever you want to do and commit as much crime as you can since you can get away with it and let your parents pay for it!”

    And this

    When those little idiots spraypaint my building, I wind up paying for it in the form of increasing rents (to offset the cost of ongoing repairs), decreased property values, or higher taxes. At least with this law, someone besides me or the state will foot the bill.

    There was mention of low income single mothers and low income families unable to pay with the thought they’ll end up doing jail time.

    Here in New Zealand crime of young teens, both male and female is soooo bad the police in my area (west)say the media isn’t allowed to report it because the government doesn’t have a solution. I went to the courthouse the other day and a lawyer told me he can’t understand why so many youth are up in front of judges with weapons. School girls brag about stabbing males in school uniform at the train station, young gangs are popping up everywhere, drive by stabbings and fights with weapons is the norm (had my fence wooden pieces ripped off for a fight last night) and it goes on and on. No adult can do anything because it’s against the law of the leftist hippies.

    I watched prime (TV station) the other night where a teacher who worked in the 70’s decided to work in 2000 and something as she is on some education board. The kids were out of control, I mean off the wall, and she stated it’s because they are not responsible for their actions and they know teachers are powerless. All kids need to be violent now. We are back to the basic animal behaviour since we don’t like any thing that males created or built.

    Comment by julie — Sat 13th February 2010 @ 6:47 pm

  2. julie says: I watched prime (TV station) the other night where a teacher who worked in the 70’s decided to work in 2000 and…

    I watched that documentary on TV too. Many of the children who featured there knew no boundaries and had zero respect for their teacher or themselves. If I was the parent of any of those children I’d remove them and home-school them regardless of what the law said I could or couldn’t do. I just WOULD!

    The State is always seeking new reasons and methods to usurp the productivity of its citizens. One could be forgiven for imagining that their Government is simply developing new sources of income for itself, where their children’s unruliness will pay State dividends later.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Sat 13th February 2010 @ 7:50 pm

  3. take responsibility for your own actions and every1 elses that govt’s tell you too…what a crock of shit…

    Comment by ford — Sun 14th February 2010 @ 8:47 am

  4. We have always said here that Youth crime and violence is engineered, fabricated entertained by Cyfs, Family Court, and all the circus around (Womens refuge, Barnardos, Relationship services etc).

    Youth violence is the brain child of the Family Court. Removing FATHERS from the children’s lives is surely a crime. The Father’s presence in a child life is the PARAMOUNT principle. Is not it Peter Dunn?

    Comment by tren Christchurch — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 9:34 am

  5. I look at the Sunday papers. The man used a length of Alkethene to beat the (Teen age) son. The son had stolen over $1000 from his father, and had a scam going at school!

    The Son seemingly gets off with a smack over the wrist with a wet tram ticket! CYF have siezed him. What good that will do is highly doubtful. Read the article. Non abusive discussion welcome.

    Comment by Alastair — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 10:44 am

  6. IMO, the kicking was too far.
    From what I can read though, it sounds like a father who had tried everything to keep his child (teenager) under control. Another failure that will probably be blamed on the dad but will in fact be the fault of the state.

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 12:37 pm

  7. I can’t imagine that my teen-age son would steal one dollar let alone $1100 from me or anyone else. I suspect that there is much more background to this child than has been reported.
    It does appear to me that the injuries sustained by the child must have been more of a psychological nature rather than physical injuries. The boy suffered no injuries and the father had made an early guilty plea, Mr Keegan said.
    Judge Allan Roberts said that he would have no compunction in jailing a man who assaulted his wife in the same way. I do wonder if Judge Roberts would do similarly if the victim had been an adult male/husband. Is Judge Roberts agreeing that women are children or was he just being emotive by excluding men from his example?
    One thing I am certain of is that the offender is in for a shock if he believes his statement: “I want the best for my family. I’m sure CYF will be able to advise and help us do that
    It appears to me that the only reason the offender will retain his freedom from jail is because he agreed to have CYFS have control over his life and his family. Welcome to commu-femi-nism.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 1:24 pm

  8. Totally agree with that last comment. He had no choice but to plead guilty and let CYFS take over his life. What a country we live in when we are bullied into accepting this sort of thing. I think we need to create a new human rights organization around the world as the current one is over-run by feminists.

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 2:23 pm

  9. I wouldn’t expect anything out of our beloved Peter Dunne nothing. He thinks everything is great and though most of the correspondence he gets is about child support he has been looking at it now for .. how long ?!!!!! One day he might do something, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

    Just found this blog on his parties website.. It shows how much they are listening !!!!!!

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 4:51 pm


    I’ve forgotten how to create a link.. OMG!

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 4:51 pm

  11. … as the current one is over-run by feminists.

    This is a question that goes out to everyone…
    Seemingly so many things are tarnished now… and the bias exists… many are handicapped by their pre-existing bias…

    How should we raise young girls today regarding feminism? What do we tell them without poisoning their young minds… I am talking about ages from about 4 up… you know? when they start asking those very adult questions… what would you (MRAs) tell your daughters… young girls who look up to you etc…?

    Comment by onewomanDV — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 5:40 pm

  12. That feminism is bad.
    That equity is right.

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 6:23 pm

  13. Please bear in mind that I’ve just viewed the video Origins of Feminism before answering your question :D.
    I think little girl’s (and boy’s)minds become poisoned with feminist ideology from the moment they begin attending pre-school and onwards. We should be counteracting the State-enforced brainwashing with an alternative view that does not encourage girls to limp while using their great-great-grandmother’s crutches, as feminism does.
    Girls should learn that they are already equal. We should be teaching them self-respect and to respect EVERYONE else … you know…. do unto others rada rada. The best way to teach any child about personal behaviour is to lead by example ourselves. Restrict their association with those who behave poorly.
    I’d be inclined to spend plenty of quality time reading stories such as Little Red Riding Hood and the Big Bad Feminist, Goldilocks and the Three Governments and other traditional greats. I’m serious. I would improvise to impart positive brainwashing. The serious damage caused by both feminist ideology and the complicity of Government needs to be counteracted.
    My daughters are 22 and 25yrs old. They’ve both grown up experiencing the cruelty of feminism with a psychiatric twist. They visit me and their younger brother almost every day and we often have lengthy conversations about material from this site and other sites with a similar theme. They wear their armour to protect themselves against the stupidity and dishonesty of feminist ideology. They’re informed. They’re both raising children (my grandchildren) with a better future than the one promised by our destructive masters.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 8:01 pm

  14. SickofNZ

    I love the story names, though I think that Goldilocks was the naughty one in that story 🙂

    We could have a modern version of Hansel and Gretel who are taken away from their father by the evil family court, Jack and the beanstalk where the giant is CYFS.
    My personal favourite would be telling my daughter the one about sleeping beauty, perhaps with womens refuge as the evil witch. It was CYFS who thought that story was ‘inappropiate for my daughter as she had drawn the prince kissing her.

    Getting off topic, so perhaps a new topic for these, or we’ll have to set up some stories somewhere online 🙂

    Comment by noconfidence — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 8:38 pm

  15. noconfidence says: so perhaps a new topic for these, or we’ll have to set up some stories somewhere online

    Hehehe … I like it :D. There’s a private area here(where we plan any soMENi stuff) that only you, Julie, MRC and I (+ 2 administrators on my forum) have access to. We could concoct some very un-politically correct children’s short stories. Just start a new thread and go for it if you want to. I’ll no doubt add my own stories there too.

    BTW: In my version of Goldilocks and the Three Governments, Goldilocks wasn’t the naughty one.

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 9:04 pm

  16. “what would you (MRAs) tell your daughters… young girls who look up to you etc…?”

    As a father with a daughter I can answer this easily. My answer helps to explain why time is so very important.
    Fathers do tell children things directly. However the real messages that they give are both more powerful and subtle. They are communicated by actions. This is both more powerful but also takes more time for a child to understand. It is an experience which they reflect on as they experience it more. A child takes time to learn this way but they also remember and learn such lessons much more deeply.

    One time my mother turned to me and said “you just have a certain way about dealing with your kids that has to be experienced to understand”. What she was referring to was the quiet, forceful and thoughtful way I addressed my two kids having a conflict.

    Fathers encourage their kids to push their personal boundaries and at the same time teach them consequences of pushing societies boundaries. They do this in a loving way which is backed by their physical power and presence. It requires the child to experience it over time.

    So called “quality time” is a bunch of crap. What children need to get the most from fathers is time.

    Comment by Dave — Mon 15th February 2010 @ 10:45 pm


    Comment by Angela — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 3:11 pm

  18. Reply to Angela

    Firstly Angela,a warm welcome back to you, and I honestly didn’t know you were only 12 years old… If I would have known I would have not been so harsh and so forthright in my reply posts…So I do apologize to you,young lady…..

    Now I see you have posted ‘’ please enlighten me as in what is the purpose of this posting…?????????

    Kind regards John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 3:27 pm

  19. I don’t think Angela is really 12. Someone just suggested that she might be.
    The site that Angela posted provides for an ambulance at the bottom of the cliff for the result of the Nanny State meddling in family lives. The title of this thread: “Swedish parents pay for nanny state failures”

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 6:06 pm

  20. “If there were staff with higher qualifications who have worked in the industry for a number of years that would help,” he replied.

    “That would be better than someone who’s just come out of polytech because judgment only comes over time.”

    This is from the inquest into the deaths of school children at the Hilliary outdoor centre last year.

    This is very male domain. Hands on learning and passing skills on. Very Lord Baden-Powell.

    Comment by downunder — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 7:26 pm

  21. Julie I’ve read a few books from the same Swedish author recently and each book has the same theme: The mothers are caring and strong.The fathers are useless.

    Comment by Rosie — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 8:06 pm

  22. Now we are starting to think…….

    Comment by downunder — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 8:51 pm

  23. Hi not shore were im meant to post ..

    Im looking to find someone that can show me how i go about applying to the
    family court to have a protection order removed.
    My ex partner has said shes fine with me applying to have it dropped

    she doesnt have the time herself to get it dropped not to mention like me
    she has no clue how shes goes about getting it removed what forms your meant to
    fill out and what your meant to say when applying to have it removed.

    in the howick area any help would be greatful the sooner i put in app the better
    as ive got 5 weeks left at dv program and am pretty shore they ant going to sign off as i refuse to participate apart from showing up every week i take it if orders removed i dont have to sit there and have there crap forced onto me

    Comment by mike — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 9:43 pm

  24. please use this link wen replying so it notifys me by email for got to click the little box on my first post thanks

    Comment by mike — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 9:45 pm

  25. Sad! What sort of books does she write?

    Comment by julie — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 11:26 pm

  26. Greetings Mike,
    This is not a good place to discuss this type of issue. It is totally open and dangerous.

    I suggest you visit and join. It is hidden. There are real experts there.

    Comment by Alastair — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 11:32 pm

  27. Hi Mike,

    I’m thinking you have already searched, ‘protection order’ on this site and was offered pages of information. Not sure if it covers what you want although I think your question would have been asked before.

    If you don’t get the answer you could ask the Family Court Registrar as a start.

    Comment by julie — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 11:50 pm

  28. Oh, I didn’t see your comment and had wondered whether you deal with clients on this. I’d like to listen to the answer because I would like to know how protection orders get removed also.

    Comment by julie — Thu 18th February 2010 @ 11:54 pm

  29. I daren’t mention the expert on this Julie, Broadly if both parties are in agreement and there have been no major breaches, parenting orders are in place etc, all in the childs best interests, it can be done. I do NOT believe MENZ is the best place to discuss details.

    Comment by Alastair — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 12:20 am

  30. Reply to OnewomanDV..A very interesting topic you have raised…This is how my Ex Mother in Law and I dealt with this situation that you have raised ……

    All what I can say OnewomanDV…My English Ex mother in law who is retired now,but still has a very sharp and a very astute mind and I have a close bond too,and she is a very well educated Lady specialized in particular Medical field ….

    We have had this exact discussion concerning my Daughter education at University ….After my Mother in Law heard about my Son experience with his heated debate with the brain washed Feminists ‘That all Men are potential Rapists and Potential Paedophiles’ at a particular University.

    My ex mother law acted,and I agree with the game plan too…..No way, did I wanted my young adult Daughter to be brainwashed and turn into a Kiwi Feminist…!!!

    Though her Family connections in England and to cut the long story short, manage to get my Daughter into into a University in England that hasn’t got this Feminist ideology…..

    I really do miss my Daughter but I have too look at the bigger picture…My Daughter is now doing extremely well at the University in England,and getting great grades….I am so proud of my Daughter..As I am so pound,and so thankful of my Ex Mother law too………..

    Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 7:54 am

  31. Dear Mike,

    It should be straight forward to discharge the PO if you are both in agreement.
    The application for discharge will require an affidavit from each of you and then submitted to the Family Court.

    I can assist with the documentation and close to Howick.

    Kind Regards
    Paul Catton

    Comment by Paul Catton — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 9:02 am

  32. I would commend Paul to you Mike.

    Are you available Paul? I had heard that you had developed “Other Interests” Hope all is well?

    To us in New Zealand with minor exceptions it feels like there is no support in Auckland.

    Comment by Alastair — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 9:35 am

  33. Hi Paul;

    Good to see you on here again. I tried to call you recently but the number you had on menz didn’t work .

    Are you still helping out or have you moved on ?

    My regards

    Comment by noconfidence — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 12:02 pm

  34. Not to mention the fact that it has nothing to do with anti-smacking legislation …

    Comment by Angela — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 1:42 pm

  35. Reply to Angela

    ….Okay then Miss Self Righteous …And Excuse me, What ‘right’ have you got on what topic can be discussed on this Forum site……????….None…..!!!!!!!!!!

    Might as well ask ….What is your opinion on ‘anti-smacking legislation.’ then…?????

    John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 2:02 pm

  36. True, Angela, but I did find it courteous and asking a reasonable question.

    FYI my view of the anti smacking bill and its proposer can be found at

    Comment by Alastair — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 2:32 pm

  37. Just a email I sent to Erin Pizzey

    A very warm Hello to you Erin Pizzey,

    My name is John ………. and I belong to a Men and a Fathers support group here in New Zealand called ‘Menz’ …….I have watch your Video interview on ‘You Tube’ and I think it was in the state of California, America ……concerning ‘feminism’…..And the destruction it has wrought onto western society as in the ‘family’ unit ….

    Your interview and your honest un-bias appraisal was such a ‘breathe of fresh air’……For the last 25 years radical feminism has affected New Zealand Society too….

    You mentioned in that interview that you are scared of what Feminism is doing to Canada society, well I can tell you right now….New Zealand is not far behind Canada concerning radical Feminism and how scary it is here in New Zealand as in a Woman/Mother can ‘just point the Finger at you’ ….And you, as in a decent, kind and loving Man/Father virtually have to prove your innocence in Court or in the Family Court ……. Again, thank you so you so much for ‘saying how it really is’…..

    My warmest regards to you….John……….

    Comment by John Dutchie — Fri 19th February 2010 @ 3:47 pm

  38. I found what forms i needed to apply to have protection order removed..
    I went to the family court and got a copy..
    Ok so im not the sharpest tool in the shed when it comes to filling out forms
    there are quiestions on it that i dont understand how to answer or what they mean so
    have decided its to hard to fill out and easier to take me chances
    attending the last 5 sessions of the program and crossing me fingers
    that the guy dont send a letter to the court at the end of it saying i
    didnt participate to the standard of his interpretation of participation
    Kind of funny if i end up in jail even no my exe is saying she wouldnt despute it if i asked for the order to be dropped then id now be going to jail for being DUMB not being able to fill out the forms … lol great..
    new i should have stayed at school past form 3 only now in my 40s do i see school does have a use lol Wonder if jails are full of other dumb guys like myself unable to understand forms why doesnt the courts put things in simple mans lingo not everyone is a rocket scientist

    Comment by mike — Sat 20th February 2010 @ 6:09 am

  39. Morning everyone, reply I received from ‘Erin Pizzey’ relating to my above Email….And after having a good long hard think on what ‘Erin’ as written….Erin is right…..And how thew hell do We all fight this agenda of..’it is political group of women who destroy the whole dv concept.’

    ‘Many years ago I was invited to New Zealand by your Mental Health group and it was before the feminists got their hands on the dv movement. The refuges were good honest places and women who were themselves violent were recognized and helped. I was banned from going to Australia because they already had control there. I have been so sad to watched New Zealand over the years going to same way. It is not a gender issue and never has been a gender issue – it is political group of women who destroy the whole dv concept. Keep the faith and I just say my prayers. good bless you lots of love Erin’

    Comment by John Dutchie — Sat 20th February 2010 @ 7:31 am

  40. Reply to Mike

    …Just ‘Stirring the Pot’ Mike….I know a guy who use to work for the corrections department many years ago

    He left the department when Woman corrections officers were allow to work in Men’s prisons….He couldn’t stand the ‘political correctness’ in dealing with Woman correction officers…..

    He said that was a greatest haven for thw ‘Kiwi Feminists’ Corrections officers to work in… He said the Feminists got the greatest buzz in locking up Men….

    He reckons some of them were ‘drooling from the mouth’ when it was lock down time…..

    I do believe him ,I saw the drool on pure delight on the Woman Police officer when she arrested me on false sexual allegation charges

    Anyway Mike hope it all works out for the best for you..and your Children…

    Kind regards to you…. John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Sat 20th February 2010 @ 1:29 pm

  41. “If, as a parent, all that concerns you is immediate compliance, then spank. But if your goal is to raise a resilient child, one capable of making good choices, communicating effectively, living a happy, successful, healthy lifestyle, and developing appropriate relationships with others, then spanking doesn’t appear to be the vehicle to take you to this outcome.” Sam Goldstein, Ph.D.
    This is a Monthly Article – October, 2002

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:49 pm

  42. Getting an occasional smack to bring me into line, now and then, as a child never did me any harm, in fact quite the opposite! – Scott B PHD from the school of hard knocks!

    This is a Scott B post 2010

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:57 pm

  43. Well actually keeping to the topic is in the Rules compiled by John P for contributors to the site. OK, I broke rule 1; mike broke rule 5 and you break rule 4 all the time. And if you must make up names for me, you may henceforth refer to me as Ms Self Righteous, John Dutchie.

    Yours sincerely,

    Here’s a full list of John P’s Rules which you will find a link to just above the “recent comments”:

    Do not post questions or comments relating to the appropriateness of another member’s post, or about the the moderating of this forum. In all cases, please report activity that you believe contradicts these rules, or questions about the moderating of the forums, to the forum moderator.

    Keep it Legal & Confidential
    The content of any post is solely the responsibility of the poster. You may register using a pseudonym if you want your identity kept secret, however your email address (which is never displayed) must be valid. You are encouraged to discuss your experiences in the Family Court, but if you do you MUST NOT include any information which identifies you or your children. This site has subscribers from a number of government departments, and ill-considered MENZ postings are regularly produced in hearings as evidence of abusiveness.

    Be aware that the webmaster will cooperate with authorities in supplying copies of posts and any information we have concerning the identity of a poster (ie: I’m not prepared to go to jail to protect your identity!).

    Observe Copyright
    Posting of material to which you do not own the copyright is not permitted. This includes the posting of large portions of articles from any other online or print publication, as well as posting large portions of posts from other forums or mailing lists (unless you are the author of the post). If a relevant article is online, provide a short summary , or a few carefully selected excerpts, and a link.

    Be Respectful
    Posts that are inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, sexually oriented, threatening, rude, mean, nasty, or invasive of a person’s privacy are not permitted.

    Be Relevant
    Discussion must remain on-topic, and be posted in the correct category (or multiple categories if appropriate). No trolls, flames, jokes, virus warnings, or commercial advertisements are permitted.

    Be Literate
    When posting articles, try to check your speling, DON’T WRITE IN ALL CAPS, use grammer proper, etc. Comments don’t matter so much, but readers should be able to understand what you mean.

    Repeated failure to follow these rules will result in your membership being terminated with extreme prejudice!”

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 8:58 pm

  44. You ridicule the post instead of engaging in intelligent debate; some might say that would be the result of what follows … you probably just aren’t self-aware enough to realise it.

    He continues: “In the final analysis, I suggest you consider how you felt if and when you were struck as a child? Time and time again, parents exposed to corporal punishment as children have told me that they complied because they feared being struck again. Yet, nearly every one has told me he or she doesn’t believe this is a good way to raise children and has worked to not perpetuate this cycle. How would you feel if, when you made a mistake, your employer, spouse, or friend struck out at you? What message would it convey? How might you respond? Spanking children, I believe, is a misguided by-product of an adaptive behavior. It is often fueled by parental anger and frustration, bearing little resemblance to a rational, science based, strategy designed to raise healthy, happy, resilient children. From this perspective, it doesn’t deserve even minor consideration in the parenting repertoire.”

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:05 pm

  45. Getting an occasional smack to bring me into line, now and then, as a child never did me any harm, in fact quite the opposite!

    So that is not an intelligement fing to say? OOPSY! You tell me what to say then! And whilst I am at it, where did I ridicule? I was merely having fun.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:07 pm

  46. For if I WAS going to ridicule I would say something like… wait… I don’t wanna be banned! 🙂

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:11 pm

  47. Clever then are we? Excellent. The occasional smack isn’t what the issue is about anyway; it’s about those parents who smack regularly – and hard. I never got smacked ’cause I was a good girl my mummy says. But then, this issue isn’t about you or me then. It’s about highly intelligent, vehemently strong-willed kids who get smacked – but smacking doesn’t work so they get smacked more and harder. Which leads to social, emotional and behavioural problems which can only then be solved by

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:19 pm

  48. How often is regular?

    How hard is too hard?

    Why isn’t it about you or me?

    Why are you on this site?

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:22 pm

  49. Also please make up your mind, one minute you are accusing me of not wanting intelligent debate, next minute you are accusing me of being clever! 😛

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:24 pm

  50. I’m trying to get a date. No man drought here. Why are you on this site?

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:31 pm

  51. For the obvious reasons of being around people and getting advice from and giving it to people who are in a similar circumstance. I think you have just answered my question.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:35 pm

  52. I haven’t been able to find a site similar to MENZ for women in New Zealand. Why do you think that is?

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:40 pm

  53. Please answer my question.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:41 pm

  54. Which question?

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:43 pm

  55. Why are you on this site?

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:43 pm

  56. It’s interesting. I’m a foreigner and there are a lot of old school attitudes still in mainstream thought that I need to to understand for the sake of my child, and myself.

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:48 pm

  57. The occasional smack is illegal, even though at present the authorities may choose not to prosecute all of them. The implication that normal levels of smacking is somehow inconsistent with raising healthy, happy, resilient children is simply not defensible from the research. Smacking is very effective at reducing behaviour that needs to be reduced quickly, and none of the alternatives are as effective at doing so. If smacking is used rarely and with restraint, it is highly effective. To rule it out as part of the child discipline repertoire is simply foolish and it will only be a matter of time before we realise that we cannot afford any further degredation of social behavioural standards. We have already seen how wrong were the social modelling predictions about removing corporal punishment from schools; since we stopped “modelling violence” in schools there is absolutely no evidence that the next generation have adopted a beautiful new nonviolent way of living. Quite the reverse; we much more often see gross disrespect for elders and rules and terrible interpersonal violence. Look at the off-duty cop who was seriously injured a few days ago by a group of teenagers, among daily examples.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:48 pm

  58. What old school attitudes?

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:49 pm

  59. So well written, I agree with every word.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:50 pm

  60. I suggest you have a look at the site I referred to Hans. All it takes to understand it is an open mind. I would hope that you, as a psychologist always keep an open mind. Hitting another human being is always wrong – child or adult.

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:53 pm

  61. Ok, if I have to tell you then I don’t want to go into examples or I’ll be here for ages. Old school attitudes are the ones that are no longer being taught in NZ schools – you either keep up and stay in touch with the new generations or you lose touch and become old school. Getting late. The posting time on this site is an hour behind. Hope you sleep well. I always do.

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 9:58 pm

  62. so you can’t even tell me one? Yet they are why you are here?

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:01 pm

  63. See Scott B, that’s old school attitude – you think that somewhat what can use dem big words has a more valid argument than someone who speaks in plain English. Teaching the 3 R’s does not teach one the think for him or herself.

    Hans, look at the statistics not overblown media case studies.

    Comment by Angela — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:02 pm

  64. I don’t see what’s old school about agreeing with someone? Please enlighten me. As for big words, I don’t see any. Maybe it is because you are foreign you think there are some? Haven’t you heard it isn’t size that matters?

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:11 pm

  65. Plus I was in school here in NZ when coporal punishment went out the window and I can tell you that kids attitudes changed. Hans is speaking the truth.

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:17 pm

  66. Angela says,

    It is often fueled by parental anger and frustration, bearing little resemblance to a rational, science based, strategy designed to raise healthy, happy, resilient children.

    This is rubbish. You are confusing child abuse with child discipline.

    Robert E. Larzelere, one of the World’s foremost experts on child correction states “There is No Sound Scientific Evidence to Support Anti-Smacking Bans.”

    Associate Professor of Psychology Dept. Human Development & Family Science – Oklahoma State University Dr Larzelere has been one of the world’s foremost experts on child correction for the past 30 years – including:

    * One of three social scientific expert witnesses on the side of successfully defending a similar section to NZ’s s59 of Canada’s Criminal Code. (The social scientific expert witnesses on the other side included Joan Durrant. Durrant has been painted as the authority on smacking bans in NZ yet was ignored in her own country!)
    * Member of Task Force on Corporal Punishment – American Psychological Association.
    * One of 7 experts invited to present at 1996 Scientific Consensus Conference on the Short- and Long-Term Consequences of Corporal Punishment – co-sponsored by American Academy of Pediatrics.

    Click here to read NZ’s Anti-Smacking Law Most Extreme in the World – Robert E. Larzelere PhD


    The fact remains that 87.6% of New Zealanders don’t agree with the ‘no smacking law’ including Helen Clarke and most other politicians. You are part of a small minority group who disagrees with the majority and wants to dictate as a small minority how the majority of good parents should raise their children.

    Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:43 pm

  67. Angela says: Hitting another human being is always wrong — child or adult.

    Is it always wrong for a woman to hit a man who is attempting to rape her?
    Is it always wrong for a man to hit a woman who is attempting to stab him?
    Is it always wrong for the SAS to hit terrorists with their bullets?
    Is it always wrong for a Policewoman to hit a criminal with her truncheon?
    Is it always wrong to hit the hand of a child who has a potentially lethal fascination with electrical outlets?
    Is it always wrong for a parent to hit a person who is attempting to murder his or her child?

    Angela says: I haven’t been able to find a site similar to MENZ for women in New Zealand. Q. Why do you think that is?

    A. Because you haven’t made it yet. Here, let me help you get started. Please post a link to your new forum when you’ve completed it so we can check it out. No thanks are necessary. I’m glad to be of service :).

    Comment by SicKofNZ — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:43 pm

  68. Here you go Angela. More women for you.

    Cindy Kiro, Ex-Children’s Commissioner

    Excerpt from Kiro’s Briefing for the Incoming Minister November 2008:

    “Emotional abuse and neglect are consistently the most common categories of substantiated cases in NZ and in comparable countries”

    The Wellingtonian: “Did you smack your kids?”
    Kiro: “I tried a couple of times. When my oldest was in nappies and was showing an interest in putting things into plug-points, I smacked him. And when they got to about eight or 10, I might have tried it…”

    Paula Bennett, Minister of Social Development

    The Minister was asked on a recent radio interview whether she thought a smack as part of good parental correction should be a criminal offence in NZ. She responded,

    ‘No I don’t, I believe that actually good parenting should be left to do that in their different ways in their different homes and I don’t have an interest in going into people’s homes and telling them how to parent…. I’ve got the hat on of being hugely hugely concerned with serious abuse — now I think they’re very different things so do understand I’m not saying that section 59 was ever going to stop that..’ (click here for audio)

    Helen Clark, Ex-Prime Minister

    Clark: “… they don’t want to see, ah, you know, stressed and harassed parents, ah, you know, called in by the police because they, they smacked a child, so I think there’s a debate to go on…”
    Interviewer: “…right … so, you don’t want to see smacking banned…”
    Clark: “Absolutely not! I think you’re trying to defy human nature.”
    – Helen Clark, Radio Rhema, Election Campaign 2005 (audio)

    “She wants to busy herself with what goes on in the homes of the nation in areas which families regard as their own responsibility, and I think she’s going over a very dangerous line.”
    – Helen Clark referring to Jenny Shipley 1999!

    Dame Kiri Te Kanawa, NZ Opera singer

    “There’s no respect — anywhere. I remember our prime minister just a year or so ago saying we must teach people respect. You don’t teach people respect — you earn respect… Teachers are not allowed to correct children. Suddenly now, you’re not allowed to smack your child — so you know, you can’t do anything without someone telling you not to do it.”

    – Close Up, February 08 (click here for audio)

    Bev Adair, Maori Child Advocate

    “I’ve been a victim of a lifetime of abuse….. but I know that a smack is not abuse… in fact I would have loved to have had a loving parent who corrected me with a smack – rather than the verbal and sexual abuse that I experienced with adults who had no regard for my welfare.

    The anti-smacking law does not deal with the real issues of child abuse.”

    Sue Bradford, Green MP,

    Smacking bill won’t help: “The epidemic of child abuse and child violence in this country continues — sadly. My bill was never intended to solve that problem.” (National Radio – 21 Dec 07)

    Comment by julie — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 10:59 pm

  69. At the end of the day, it is no business of the state to take an interest in family matters.

    Comment by martins — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 11:44 pm

  70. 87 percent of us tried telling them that!

    Comment by Scott B — Tue 23rd February 2010 @ 11:49 pm

  71. Reply to Angela….

    There you go Angela,below is a radical Feminist and Lesbian organization for to you to join..there are plenty of Kiwi Feminists movement for you to join and you can carry on your with Feminist social engineering crusade…

    Oh,a question for you Angela,here in New Zealand we have a ‘Ministry of Woman’s Affairs’,but no ‘Ministry of Men’s Affairs’…’Why do you think that is?’

    ‘I haven’t been able to find a site similar to MENZ for women in New Zealand. Why do you think that is,I haven’t been able’….

    Here it is ….. Angela

    Auckland Women’s Centre
    4 Warnock Street
    Westmere, Auckland 1021
    (09) 376 3227

    Kind regards to you,Angela…. John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 7:41 am

  72. Reply to Scott B

    Haaaaaaaaa…Yes Scott, I concur with you…But here in my humble opinion lies the biggest problem with our so called… ‘Democracy’…. here in New Zealand…stated in ‘Tongue in Cheek’

    We do not have a written Constitution ‘written by the people, for the people’ that guarantees a fundamental human rights to the citizens of New Zealand….Like curtailing ‘Nanny’ state which is more and more interfering with the daily life of decent normal hardworking New Zealanders and equally important playing the part of the slow destruction of the ‘Family Unit’…..
    Don’t even mention the ‘Bill of Rights’ that one as a Barrister of the record as told me.. you might as well use it as ‘Toilet paper’……..

    Kind regards to you Scott …John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 1:09 pm

  73. Thanks Paul ive worked it out is was the legal questions
    that got me asking think it was something like under what section of the act am i applying to have it removed. Spoke to the staff in family courts office and they said i need not even bother fulling that part out and only to put me personal details and a affidavit.

    Funny thing is my ex did not no a bailiff would serve papers on her
    and when i found this out after file ling papers she got all upset
    and said she didnt want a bailiff showing up at her house incase her daughter or family members were there. She threatened to not agree to have it removed because of the bailiff thing and said if i try with draw it she will file the application herself to get it removed..
    What gets me is ive had the bailiff show up in from of my kids that are in my care 3 or 4 times since this order was taken out.. I was upset about that to… its like stuff my kids as long as her and her kid is fine.. Pretty unfair system
    I guess now i can only wait and hope she keeps her word and removes the order as promised

    Comment by Mike — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 3:00 pm

  74. Mike,

    Sounds like she might not. Hope for your sake she does!

    Comment by Scott B — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 3:10 pm

  75. Reply to Angela

    L.O.L ….’I’m trying to get a date. No man drought here.’…

    Angela and just been cheeky here ….What…!!! As in trying to get a date…Sorry but this is definitely not the site for you to try and get a date Young Lady…

    The Men on here on the whole wouldn’t be suitable for your tastes…Why do you ask.???.Answer… We haven’t been so called ‘liberated’ by ‘Feminism’ and we also haven’t been ‘Feminized’ enough for your liking….

    Oh, which Country are you from ..???..If you don’t mind me asking…..

    Kind regards John Dutchie

    Comment by John Dutchie — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 4:17 pm

  76. Record your discussions with her so that they can be used later if you have to go back to court regarding protection order. The judge may not like the idea that she is changing her mind at whim with regard to the protection order. then again, these are judges of the family court with no morals whatsoever.

    Comment by noconfidence — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 5:32 pm

  77. Dear Mike,

    What should have been simple has turned sour.

    Please contact asap.

    Paul Catton
    East Auckland Refuge for Men and Children
    (09)271 3020

    Comment by Paul Catton — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 6:44 pm

  78. Thanks for these quotes Julie, they’re an excellent selection.

    Comment by Hans Laven — Wed 24th February 2010 @ 8:27 pm

  79. Thanks guys for all the comments. She has promised to file the papers
    by Wednesdays … Will let yous know how it goes and if she is sincere..

    Cheers .. Oh and our contact is by email only as in dif cities so i have records of everything thats been said ..

    Comment by Mike — Fri 26th February 2010 @ 7:56 pm

  80. Site rules about GRAMMAR, hmmmm

    Be Literate
    When posting articles, try to check your speling, DON’T WRITE IN ALL CAPS, use grammer proper, etc. Comments don’t matter so much, but readers should be able to understand what you mean.

    Comment by martins — Sat 27th February 2010 @ 1:56 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment

Please note that comments which do not conform with the rules of this site are likely to be removed. They should be on-topic for the page they are on. Discussions about moderation are specifically forbidden. All spam will be deleted within a few hours and blacklisted on the stopforumspam database.

This site is cached. Comments will not appear immediately unless you are logged in. Please do not make multiple attempts.

Skip to toolbar