MENZ ISSUES

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

Victims’ Protection Bill

Filed under: Domestic Violence — Jonathan @ 7:11 am Fri 15th June 2018

New Bill put forward by the Greens (Jan Logie MP), and it’s passing appears to be imminent:
Jan Logie states “The bill would extend leave provisions to include domestic violence leave as when women leave a violent situation it can be very hard for them to juggle court, counselling, housing and the needs of their children without extra leave. “, which isn’t too encouraging. However, on perusal of the draft it does appear to be inclusive of male victims also, as it refers to “his or her employers” when referring to victims.
Draft can be found at https://www.greens.org.nz/policy/fairer-society/domestic-violence-victims-protection-bill

7 Responses to “Victims’ Protection Bill”

  1. Downunder says:

    It’s going to be interesting.

    It is the changes to existing legislation that are more important than the opportunity for an extra two weeks leave to deal with ‘domestic violence’.

    One in particular is to health and safety recognising domestic violence as a cause of work accidents or an unnecessary risk.

    This an issue we tried unsuccessfully to raise a decade ago when men were dealing with separation and Family Court litigation.

    Employers have been expected to unofficially carry this burden when fathers are struggling with these issues.

    They are very real situations – a destressed man in charge of a fully loaded B-Train is a huge risk to the idividual and the public.

    Naturally men are simply just expected to cope.

    It’s a real slap in the face considering our previous efforts to have this recognised. But seeing the emphasis placed on this issue in the context of domestic violence, how will health and safety respond?

    I doubt this is receiving any serious debate, because the wider implications of its effect have not been considered outside of the narrow point of view of a women’s domestic situation.

  2. Downunder says:

    The Bill amends the Object (or purpose) section of the Domestic Violence Act 1995 to provide that a victim of domestic violence, for the purposes of that Act, is a person who suffers domestic violence.

    For the purposes of other enactments, a victim of domestic violence is a person who is able to produce a domestic violence document because the person has suffered domestic violence or because the person provides care or support to an individual in the person’s immediate family or household who requires care or support because the individual suffers domestic violence in the individual’s family (Part 1, Clause 5, amending Section 5 of the Domestic Violence Act 1995 by inserting New Section 2A).

    The Bill also defines the term “domestic violence document” as:

    a police report confirming attendance at an incident involving domestic violence;

    a record of a police caution relating to domestic violence;

    a record of criminal proceedings for an offence relating to domestic violence;

    a record of a conviction for an offence relating to domestic violence;

    a record of a court’s finding of fact of domestic violence against a person by another person;

    a court order relating to domestic violence;

    a report from a medical practitioner stating that a person has injuries or a condition consistent with having suffered domestic violence;

    a report from a domestic violence support organisation relating to a person who has suffered domestic violence;

    any other document prescribed in regulations made under the Domestic Violence Act 1995 (Part 1, Clause 4, amending Section 2 of the Domestic Violence Act 1995 by inserting a new definition, that of “domestic violence document”).

  3. Downunder says:

    Hazard of a worker suffering domestic abuse

    The Bill replaces the definition of hazard so that a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU) must, in taking all practicable steps to ensure that workers are not exposed to hazards, including the hazard of a worker suffering domestic violence. The Bill also provides that PCBUs must have policies on handling situations arising from the hazard of a worker suffering domestic violence and they are required to take all practicable steps to ensure that health and safety representatives receive training in supporting workers who are victims of domestic violence (Part 3, Clauses 9-12 amending Sections 16 and 37m and clause 10 of Schedule 2 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015).

  4. Downunder says:

    At present the Bill is before the Committee of the Whole House which means its up for alternatives wording or adjustments before becoming law in the very near future.

    The very obvious affect here is that there will be a rush on documents to verify domestic violence (defined as copied in above).

  5. DJ Ward says:

    Recently someone provided a link to a blog that I decided to explore. Some interesting reads.

    A comment was made (by a women) that when women do something, specifically those in the feminist movement that thier actions always have an intent to get money. Particularly money that’s in thier control like government money or belongs to someone else. That’s inherently men, even the governments money is ultimately from men. Women as a group not only don’t pay tax but they get a lifetime average $150,000 bonus.

    Let’s test that theory out with this law.

    “For the purposes of other enactments, a victim of domestic violence is a person who is able to produce a domestic violence document”
    So heh ladies you can get 2 weeks off if you get one of those documents.

    Oh wow my heroine Jan. Where do I get one?
    Just call the cops. Apart for the cost to taxpayers (men) of thier time it’s free.

    Also just go to any of all these dispensaries. Shine, Women’s Refuge, and a multitude of other social service providers. Don’t worry they won’t charge. The taxpayers (men) will provide all the funding needed to ensure the services are widely available and properly resourced.

    Also if you have an ex boyfriend that was bad too you and deserves some retribution then just go to the cops and tell some story about a past event, we all have them, and how when you rung him last night he said some nasty things before you were forced to hang up. It’s a free service and can be used as ammunition for anybody at a later date. Don’t worry the taxpayer (men) don’t charge for these vital services.

    So the cops get more calls. > more arrests> more prosecutions> more Lawyers
    So the service providers get more victims. > more money
    So the cops get more complaints. > more protection orders > more Lawyers
    So the cops get more accusations > more prosecutions > more Lawyers
    More men having to go to court to see thier kids> more Lawyers

    More HR administration in companies> more mostly female jobs
    More employement disputes> more Lawyers

    Apparently a large percentage of these Lawyers are women in this field of work.

    So what’s this law about then?
    When you follow the money it doesn’t look the same as the intent of the law.
    But that’s the bribery, because the need of some people to have time off work is real.
    Employers have some costs (lots of male owned enterprises) but I’m sure in genuine cases they don’t mind helping out a little. Legislation in a caring society may not even need to happen.
    The issue is the incentive too exaggerate, manipulate and outright lie is increased and despite is benefits and moral high ground this Law will sure as hell transfer a shitload of male wealth into the hands of females.

    What was said in the begining?

  6. Downunder says:

    The other issue that might arise here is difficult teenagers being the domestically violent person?

    Two weeks mental health leave for mothers?

  7. Evan Myers says:

    @5 That’s what Feminists refer to on this site as bitching about nothing and it’s often individual examples.

    As you put it … there is a woman on another website providing a global analysis of the behavior as she sees it in other women.

    The questions then become

    Can she look beyond that and see the damage?
    Is she going to step out of the broad spectrum sisterhood and say we must stop this?
    Is she going to challenge Feminist leaders who say we haven’t gone far enough yet?

    Feminists are as aggressive toward female dissidents as they are towards male activists.

Leave a Reply

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