Over recent days I have been involved as expert witness in an interesting District Court trial by jury. My client has given me permission to report on it and I will avoid using names and identifying details.

The man was accused on two counts of breaching a protection order, and the judge ended up offering a deal in which if he pleaded guilty and met several conditions then she would discharge him without conviction. She said several things of likely interest to this group.

Firstly, in questioning the man during the process of reaching the decision to discharge him, the judge wanted him to refrain from various activities that might extend the conflict with his ex wife that had led to the protection order and the present charges. The judge noted that the man had been supported in Court by representatives of fathers’ groups, and asked him if he intended to have any ongoing contact with groups like those who had been protesting against the Family Court. I thought it significant that a judge even in the District Court was acutely aware of the protests as well as the general movement and saw them as a serious influence.
(more…)

I will give you a clue. J.B

What a cute baby Santa is holding.

My ex used the Family Court to “steal” my child from me. By writing a pack of lies in affodavits, the training came from a new partner, who had “used” the Court also to personel advantage.
I am now forced to do supervised access, as this is the only way to see my child, even though I filed a defence to the Court, I beleive the decision was made before I walked in the door ?
I have a big problem with how the Family Court operates, changes are urgent, before any more families are damaged and destroyed in this Country.
below is my list of issues
1. without notice applications that are not necessary.
2. The closed doors and secrecy.
3. The adversorial system that operates, “who lies the best wins”
4. State funded child theft.
5. No one “teaches” you the system until you fall on your face into it.
6.The way the service changed from my Lawyer once I changed from paying to legal Aid.
7. There was no thought for the effect on my child or other siblings in the family.
8. You need to be wealthy to have any chance of a “fair go”
9. The Court delivery people who smile at you when they deliver something that destroys you sanity.

I have now joined the Mens support group, who have been warm, welcoming, understanding and supportive.
It is shocking to meet so many people who all tell the same “horror story” who are also living the same nightmare. how can so many people have the same story to tell ?
for my next occupation, I will be at AUT studying Law, so that I can help other victims in a few years time.

THANK GOODNESS THAT SOMEONE IS TRYING TO CHANGE “THE SYSTEM”

Julian

In the late 70’s I was living in London when the National Front (An extreme right wing political party right) marched through central London. As I photographed some of the marchers I observed that a lot of them were young and angry, however my lens captured an old lady that looked as sweet as they can be. After the march finished I approached her and introduced myself. She was very pleasant so I asked her why she was marching. She spent the next hour telling me a horrific story. Idi Amin, ex president and despot of Uganda had expelled thousands of Ugandan Asians and as most of these had British passports they arrived on British Shores. Massive social upheaval occurred particularly in London where most of them wanted to settle.

(more…)

Muriel Newman’s newsletter is worth reading this week: Nature Knows Best

Over time, human evolution gave rise to the two-parent married family, often described as the most successful child rearing institution ever invented. But by the middle of the 19th century, socialism had begun its march and in its sights, the destruction of the nuclear family: in 1948 Carl Marx called for the ‘abolition of the family’ in his Communist Manifesto and, aided and abetted by the feminist movement, what had taken more than a million years to evolve, has, in just over 150 years been largely undermined.

Each step in this erosion of the family has been incremental: the establishment of no-fault divorce made it easy to walk away from the commitment of marriage; the introduction of the domestic purposes benefit with its built-in financial incentives rewarded mothers who split up from their husbands; the practice of awarding sole custody of children to mothers made it easier to consider separation (I recall seeing research some years ago which showed that around 70 percent of marriage break-ups were instigated by mothers who were confident they would gain sole custody of their children); the enforcement of a punishing child support regime which fails to take into account the financial circumstances of both parents or to ensure the money is spent on the children, often handicaps subsequent families.

Even better, the NZ Centre for Political Debate guest Forum has an article by Stuart Birks: Disgruntled Dads and the Family Court

The Women’s Consultative Group of the New Zealand Law Society has stated, in a submission to the Law Commission, “At the heart of the current law on domestic violence in New Zealand, as embodied in the Domestic Violence Act 1995, lies a very simple concept: domestic violence is about the use of power by men to control their women partners”. This is based on the Duluth patriarchal power and control model, which has been so influential as to dominate policy over all alternative approaches. It has a major failing, however. Numerous large-scale studies have found that women are as likely to be violent as men, and in many cases when one partner is violent, the other is also.

We could ask more generally whether the people who are employed to address family law matters are properly trained, not just in terms of domestic violence, but in the whole range of issues surrounding family relationships, care of children, relationship property, child support, and so on. Proper training requires a theoretical and practical knowledge of several areas of psychology, sociology, social work and economics, in addition to law. We might consider brain surgeons to be very intelligent, but we might be reluctant to have one fix our car. Similarly, even an intelligent lawyer may be poorly suited to deliberating on family matters. At the same time, other specialists may also have limitations. There may be a big difference between the way a psychologist, say, might interact with and assess a client, and the perspective required to obtain suitable evidence for a court. In addition, while courts may be able to make decisions on specific, one off situations (such as a crime, or the interpretation of a contract), it is far more complicated to address issues such as parent-child relationships, which consist of numerous small events spread over years, and which change and evolve as people grow and other life-events occur.

I’d like to post an op-ed piece which our News Editor, John T. Smith, has recently released to a number of newspapers around the world. This is an effort to catalyse some useful discussion about the direction the men’s movement has been taking in some places, and is not intended as a criticism of any group in particular. Obviously, the Fathers-4-Justice play a large rôle in recent press coverage in the U.K., but they are not alone in having raised the eyebrows of press and public alike.

We believe this is an important issue, and invite comments and ideas from all camps of opinion, whether posted here or on the World Fathers Union weblog, The Father’s Tale.

Over to you, John T.–

Is Bad Press Better Than No Press?

by John T. Smith, News Editor, World Fathers Union

In recent weeks, various organisations working for equitable treatment for fathers in family courts have garnered a satisfyingly large amount of press coverage in a short time. I say satisfyingly large, because how can we not feel pleased that the press are paying attention to us, no matter what they are actually saying? I have seen a baker’s dozen of stories cross my desk in the last two days, all from major media outlets in the U.K., New Zealand, and North America.

But there’s a somewhat questionable bun in that basket: We’re getting attention, yes…but what will be the general sentiment of the public as a result? In Montréal, a distraught father who had not seen his child in seven years climbed a billboard next to a major bridge and the resulting traffic snarls and commuter ire became the story of the week, being heard as far away as Texas, in the southern U.S. In London, a live telecast of the lottery drawing was interrupted by F4J protestors, including a woman. In Christchurch, The Father’s Coalition distributed pamphlets identifying divorce lawyers and staff of the family court to their neighbours, bringing down the wrath of the local bar association and generating distinctly unfriendly coverage in The Press of that city.
(more…)

I was in Russia last year and met a lady, Natasha, in small town 400km north of Moscow. When she knew I was from NZ she was excited and wanted to talk to me about her life time hero, John Walker. Over the last year I have built up a good relationship with her and met some of her Russian friends here. If you are single, intelligent and want a real lady in your life you have better odds of success with a Russian one.

Below is a letter I received from Natasha that gives a good insight into the mind of a 37yr old Russian Woman.

……..I could never understand feminism. Sometimes I laugh at these crazy women, sometimes I pity these poor unhappy women who maybe just were not destinied to meet real men?? And I don’t have any familiar feminists to talk in person to and find out what makes a woman try so unnatural role and function?? For me personally, a feminist is a kind of monster who pretends to be man and woman at once, but instead she looses all her feminity, charm and attraction and at the same time she fails in getting qualities of a true man. She becomes a type of scary hybrid:-) Total failure:-(
(more…)

Saturday 10 June, 8pm-1am

Who should be there? Amongst, the Republicans you will find the most staunch advocates and fathers and fathers in families. You might also find another group of staunch individuals, – those who are confronting the law. Would you want to be there? Is the law always right? A man is born with two instincts. First he understands right from wrong, and second he understands justice and injustice. The law is not always right; it depends entirely on who writes it. I’m going to be there, how about you?

Details, on notice board – to the right- scroll down.

Today I stopped by a mighty Totara. I said to him, “you must have stood against some mighty storms in your time, but you are still standing.”

“Yes”, said the mighty Totara, but I have my roots in solid ground. “Why do you ask?”

Well, I am weathering the mighty storm of feminism, and even though I have my roots in solid ground I feel like I might be uprooted.

Mighty Storm, M.I.G.H.T.Y S.T.O.R.M, said the Totara, that’s not a mighty storm, feminism is just a case of bad breath.

We’re now on court records, team. Judge Mathers came out with his decision today (can’t mention the content just yet) but in it was references to my and your mails to this site.

Anyone in the mood to get stuck into Lizzie-My-Diet-Isn’t-Working, can do so to her boss. You might like to mention that you are somewhat surprised that Lizzie MDIW is here on a temp work permit, ruining the lives of NZ children.

Isn’t that just such a great set-up? I vaguely remember some viscious Yank psycho-mess who spent a whole lot of time trying to ruin the lives of a mother/sister/son play-centre in San Diego, then came to NZ on a temp permit to help put Peter Ellis away.

Her boss is at Waitakere is…..

[email protected]

And if you’re in a mood to say a few choice words to Sandra’s boss, then go here… [email protected]

Don’t get too comfortable Lizzie. You may have got the ticket but the money ain’t delivered yet.

Anyway, our concerns and fears are now in official court records. At least 43 pages of them are there now. That has to be a good start.

However, I thought you might all enjoy the following.

The first is Paul Bakers reply to my email; followed by my email.
(more…)

Here comes Sue Bradford again with her bid to repeal section 59 of the Crimes Act. While she now concedes there will have to be changes to her bill, one can only ask why then would we not change the current legislation rather than repeal it. Her bill does not contain the words mother and father, as the current legislation does.

59.Domestic discipline–

Every parent of a child and, subject to subsection (3) of this section, every person in the place of the 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.

And you say, but I didn’t see mother and father there either.

If there can be a person in place of a parent, then what is a parent?

The answer is a mother and a father.

Loose section 59 and you will empower the state parent of the Family Court. This state wants legal ownership of our sons and daughters.

Extract from the above stuff link:

The bill passed its first reading before the election with the help of Labour, but its continued support is not guaranteed. Whip Darren Hughes said a decision on further support would be made after the committee reported, though Labour agreed some reform was required.No surprise that Sue Bradford’s private members bill coincides with the Government’s agreement with the United Nations to repeal this law during 2005.

note steeling is not a spelling mistake, just an obscure meaning.

It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things. For the reformer has enemies in all those who could profit by the old order, and only lukewarm defenders in all those who could profit by the new order. This lukewarmness arises partly from fear of their adversaries, who have the laws in their favour, and partly from the incredulity of mankind, who do not truly believe in anything new until they have an actual experience of it.

Niccola Machiavelli, The Prince

The above was written 400 years ago. It seems just as relevant today as it was back then. Below are some other interesting quotes.

Generally speaking, the younger and more highly educated people are, the more likely they are to change

Resistance is often a reaction to the methods of instituting change rather than change itself.

Many people fear the unknown and the uncertainty accompanying change. They also fear losing their jobs, losing respect or status and failure.

When logic vies with emotion it rarely stands a chance.

Romney & Steinbart

On Nine to Noon yesterday, Katherine Rich interviewed Bruce Tichbon from Families Apart Require Equality.

Photo: Bruce Tichbon in action last weekend (from Noelle’s video – link below transcript).

For the next few days you can listen to the audio here.

I was so impressed with Bruce’s communication skills I have transcribed his responses for everyone to read. Rich’s questions are paraphrased.

Question: what happened over the weekend?

In Palmerston [Nth] we got a team together and we went around the homes of two Family Court lawyers and a psychologist. We are aware that other groups all round the country are staging similar protests.

The objective is to just make people aware of what is going on in the Family Court, and is to try and get the message across.

I have to say Katherine, we’ve tried everything. I have been actively campaigning for 15 years to try and get reform. We’ve been to Select Committees, politicians, we’ve talked to judges, the Law Society, the Law Commission, we’ve done reports, everything you can think of. It’s just doesn’t get a response.

So now we are ramping up the action, and we are just doing things that tend to get a bit more public attention. And a bit more media attention!

Question: Have you not seen any improvement over your 15 years?

No. I talk to hundreds of people out there who are affected. We are not seeing these improvements at all. In fact, what is being done and what is being presented by the Family Court industry (if I may call it that) is really quite misleading.
(more…)

Peter Boshier last week sent out a letter to every solicitor in NZ giving them his support in their job of working in his court. He is right in doing this, that’s his job. In attacking the court workers at their homes, fathers have attacked the system and challenged the sanctity of law. We now have a situation where Mr Boshier has taken up a strong position and will not easily be moved from it. It is possible that both he and many other Lawyers were aware of the injustice in some of the interpretations of law. He will find it more difficult to make changes to these now.

If the written word (law) was a definitive arm of justice we would live in a perfect world. We don’t, that’s why in the West we have a legion of Christian denominations all interpreting from the same written word, the Bible.

The Family Court can be viewed as a religion and the judges as denominations. I have found some to interpret totally different on the same piece of law. Some lawyers and judges are from a denomination that interprets men as demons. No law will change that. Religious fanatics believe that the ends justify the means, so to lie and cheat to defeat a Demon is justified.

Emotionally I can understand protesting against individuals but rationally I cannot see the sort of changes happening that will bring about a more fair result for children.

In order to clarify their objectives can some of the protesters lay these out for me please.

I unfortunately do not have an answer but believe that answers can be found.

Of one thing I am sure, throw a man out of his home and isolate him from his children without just cause and you do irreparable damage that will have a flow on effect detrimental to all concerned.

Judge Peter Boshier says –

the noisy protests amount to a “personal vendetta by individuals who do not respect the legitimacy of the court”.

There is a name for a court which by definition perverts legal procedure and most would be familiar with the term Kangaroo court. You may be less familiar with the term Palm Tree Justice — a phrase used to describe the concept of Justice without principle, but according to expediency. History has left other equally unacceptable courts, with suitable titles, which describe the tendency of their ideological nature, and their tragic outcomes, which often involves the death or disappearance of those subjected to its jurisdiction.
It may be less obvious to many, amid the projections of a seemingly idyllic society; however it is the latter category, into which the New Zealand family court has evolved.
Confirmed by the editor of the Dominion Newspaper, recently when he said,

But while men continue to beat up or kill their wives and girlfriends, the court’s judges are, from time to time, obliged to rule that mum should have primary custody and make an order telling her husband or boyfriend to stay away.

Sympathy for what will become histories greatest crusade of banner and cause. As the quiet confrontation of gender superiority, raises a mounting death toll, we have yet to accept that under the banner of women’s rights and in the name of domestic violence, there has been a ruthless crusade against fatherhood, a crusade which without protest would see fatherhood hunted to extinction.
The Moa Court, you say isn’t evidenced by a gulag, or a mass grave. Really? The subtle nature of feminism saw no need of such instruments. There were already prisons, and grave yards, in which those casualties might remain obscure.
Fop every domestic murder there are numerable suicides and deaths, for which this court accepts no responsibility, and all those deaths, not just the consequence of a ruthless regime, but of every sympathizer who lives the lie.

The Moa Court, another roller coaster, out of control, another tragedy, yet to be told, and another reality for us to face up to, or are we going to be typically human again.
You may run Mr Boshier, from the mass grave of male suicide, but when the light of day finds its way into your court room, it may be the only place left for you to hide.

Okay. Had a hearing on Friday. Judge mathers reserved his decision.

Now get this. The CYFS witch wanted a S78.

Rod Hooker argued that ‘case law’ asserted that for such a crude and child-destructive mechanism to be used, one had to demosntrate a clear and immediate danger to the child.

During the hearing the CYFS lawyer, one Margy Bird, asserted CYFS big fear was for the child’s ‘future’ security…..not the now and clear and present danger required by the test for allowing the use of a S78….but her future.

Even Judge Mathers asserted he wasn’t interested in the future, but only in the hear and now, as regards danger.

But here’s the kicker. My lawyer asserts the chances of Mathers allowing the s78 is 50/50. No evidence of present danger exists. In fact no evidence of past danger exists. It’s all ‘maybe’ in the future. But acording to unnamed sources, fear of getting it wrong drives ‘some’ judges’.

CYFS agreethat no clear and present danger exists, yet he may well allow these foul witches to rip my grand daughter, and now her seriously mentally disabled brother, whom I have also being looking after while his little sister is in hospital, having undergone her seventh major operation today, from my care.

There is a small part of me which hopes they do because, if they do, I will turn this into the biggest media circus ever.

I now have copies of every last interlocutory application and court response. If any of this shit could past the test of the belief of the ordinary man on the street, then I’ll start believing in fairies.

And if Mathers gives these vile witches their S78, then we will truly have something with which to fight back. And TV3 are now just awaiting the outcome and the full story.

We will see. Watch this space.

Cheers
David.

Clearly the wee dear likes our site. She must because she visited it again on Thursday night and copied a whole bunch more posts including; just for drill, my Song For Al. Sadly, the judge, having read the earlier affidavit, (43 pages of MENZ posts) or parts thereof, dismissed the second offering and requested Lizzie take it back. I couldn’t decide whether I should be offended, or just laugh. But given the subtle glare I think I got from the judge, shutting up seemed like a good plan.

Hells teeth! For a short moment in time I thought my Song For Al might have gotten official recognition. :–))

Anyway, I’m working on a whole bunch more songs and thought I might spend a few bucks at a recording studio cutting a CD. This could form the basis of a fund-rasier for Mr Hell-On-Wheels and the Frequent Visitors troop.:–))
(more…)

The below is the NZ Herald address for a most interesting article. It seems even highly professional teachers have seen the damage the feminazi has caused society.

BTW: One quoted person, Paul Baker, is the Rector of Waitaki Boys Highschool. If you get a chance visit their site and read the Faculty list. I think you will be both amazed and edified.

Cheers
David

New Zealand Herald:
Boys – the classroom timebomb

Picture this – a society of uneducated, unemployed, unsocial and increasingly violent men. This possibility is all too real, according to some in the education sector. And as the gap between girls’ and boys’ achievement continues to grow, they are warning it could have dire effects on society.
…

Many in the ministry of education are stuck fighting the “girls can do anything” battle, he [Dr Paul Baker] says. “There is a huge reluctance in the ministry to accept that emphasis needs now to be more on boys.”

Parent treaty. Sounds like a very good idea to me. Something we could do in New Zealand.

Working on a draft Declaration of Equal Parenting created by David Shackleton (Everyman’s editor and publisher) and Andrew C. MacDonald, each section was lovingly laboured-over by a small group of men and women. It was then brought to the plenary, where David Shackleton focussed the many voices until they came to a statement that all could endorse. During a moving ceremony, the document was signed by everyone present.

International Men’s Network
Declaration of Equal Parenting

Belgium, of all places, has now passed laws enforcing equal 50:50 parenting as a rebuttable presumption.

Mens.network

Oh, What’s this: Jim Bailey New Zealand National President of the IMN, Founder of Family Orientated Men, NZ
Jim has now retired to spend more time with his family, we wish him all the best. I don’t see Jim as retired.
(more…)

Watching the news as I often do, I saw the Christchurch Press roasting a male recruiting officer for telling a young man his attire was a little gay. As we are looking for a 1000 new officers I thought I would hit the streets and ask the boys on the front line what they thought about gayness in the police.

What did they say? “The place is infested with them”.

Perhaps this recruiting officer did have cause for concern after all. It wasn’t gay men that drew the most flak. They aren’t the effeminate type, and they know it’s their job if they get out of line.

The lesbians on the other hand seem to be the main source of discontent, with male officers. They are congregating in various police stations. Takapuna was named as one, which would be, either a stronghold or an outpost depending on your point of view.

It would come as no surprise that recruiting young men might be difficult if they spoke to a frank police officer.

The recruiting problem doesn’t get any easier if the retention rate of serving officers is so low. The real training for a police officer is the first two years on the street. That’s were you have to cut the mustard, and it doesn’t help if you don’t have good senior staff to guide new trainees.

Looks like there is more trouble on the other side of the thin blue line than we thought, and once again only half the story in the media.

Researching through this site I have come across open for change bill with petition forms.
I had heard that much of what people are suggensting today (well, I) has already been done 2 years ago. Maybe it is time to do exactly the same again. Especially with the limelight.

I also found pictures of Jim and Bevan protesting outside the court. Gee, Jim, the years haven’t aged you at all.

For those who have seen Shrek, and watched him sadly pondering the motives of Women, you will recognise the tune. It’s actually a Leonard Cohen which begins, ‘I thought I heard a secret chord……’

For you, Al and Julie….

Viscious

I thought I heard a secret code.

Saying Justice was really just a word,

Cos you don’t really care for justice do you.

It goes like this, the words of CFYS,

The lies the tales, the modern myths

Another man is broken by the system.

Ah, we’ll screw you, ah, well screw you.

Ah we’ll screw you, ah, we’ll screw you.

They said I was a violent man

Statistics show it all began

The day I failed to just become a still-born

My sex dictates, like all my mates

That women centre all their hates

And I will never ever be a human.

Ah, we’ll screw you. Ah we’ll screw you.

Ah we’ll screw you, Ah we’ll screw you.

They said I have improper thoughts

That I like to wash my daughter’s shorts

And there’s the proof we need to really screw you.

It goes like this, the words of CYFS

Are gospel truths, no buts nor ifs

And truth is something we don’t want to deal with

Ah, we’ll screw you. Ah we’ll screw you.

Ah, we’ll screw you. Ah we’ll screw you.

My broken child is left adrift

In an all new home, care of CYFS

My child no longer has my complete protection

And now my child is far away

In a home with kids whose minds were flayed

By the scum who daily wreck our little children

Ah, we’ll screw you, ah we’ll screw you.

Ah we’ll screw you. Ah, we’ll screw you.

How do those who feel completely abandoned by any hope of receiving justice, get their point across to the Family Courts?

This is justice which should be meted out after the due process of positive proof has been offered, all witnesses examined and cross-examined to the point where the reasonable man on the street can arrive at a reasoned conclusion?

And where the accused (mostly we men) are deemed innocent till proven otherwise.

Proof which is founded on hard evidence, corrobarated by parties of sound mind and age. Not unfounded allegation, opinion, and malicious suggestion.

It seems one way is to bring the court’s attention to the fact that a very significant proportion of the population has lost faith in its integrity. Surely, no greater negative comment can be made of any court in any land than, ‘We, the general public no longer trust you’re impartialty or integrity,’ the very statement which has been made on countless thousands of occasions at this site.
(more…)

Child Support Fact Sheet Number One

Family Law Review Editorial Slams Current Child Support Regime.

Brief extracts from Shaky Support editorial by John Caldwell, Senior Lecturer in Law, Canterbury University writing in the New Zealand Family Law Review 2005-3

“It would certainly now be timely for a newly elected New Zealand Government to consider some wholesale changes to our own much criticised child support scheme..”

“In this legislation problems are quite simply endemic.”

“……an Australian Institute of Family Studies survey in 2005 showed strong support for both parents income to be taken into account. The Taskforce proposed a new “income shares” approach. New Zealand is now lagging far, far behind.”

“…..in an administrative review the rules of natural justice are virtually at vanishing point. For instance, telephone hearings can be conducted, there is no power to compel a party to appear in the presence of another, no legal representation, and no published decisions. Given the impact a Commissioner’s review decision has on the financial rights of the respective parties this blatant legislative exclusion of basic procedural protections is quite extraordinary.”

“However the Australian reassessment suggests a more thoroughgoing root and branch re-evaluation is now needed in this country as well.”

(more…)

Middle-class parents who spoil their children have created a new breed of playground bullies who are tormenting their classmates, British MPs have been warned.

The youngsters – dubbed “the brat bullies” – come from “nice” homes but have been brought up to always get what they want, said Michele Elliott, director of children’s charity Kidscape. Some children were arriving at school believing that they were “little gods” because their over-indulgent parents had never been able to say “no” to them, she said.

Ms Elliott’s remarks follow warnings from British head teachers this month that parents who can’t say no to their children are guilty of “loving neglect”. She told the House of Commons’ education select committee: “In addition to children coming from homes where bullying is basically fostered, we found a whole other group of bullies who come from homes where they are so indulged that they go to school and they are little gods.

“They think that everything just revolves around them.

“We call them the ‘brat bullies’.”

“They are spoilt by their parents and feel that the world basically owes them, and that the other children should be as in awe of them as their families,” she said.

“They expect all the teachers and other kids to kow-tow to them. If they don’t, they start to bully the other children.

“The parents of these children are pretty difficult to deal with because they do not see the children in that situation.”

Ms Elliott added that “brat bullies” were more likely to be girls than boys arguing that boys tended to “sort each other out”.

This month, Mick Brookes, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said some children at primary school were falling asleep at their desks because their parents did not send them to bed at a reasonable time.

He told the committee that girls used “non-verbal communication” to bully each other. A group of girls would walk up to one of their classmates and deliberately turn away without speaking to her in order to isolate her.

NZ Herald: Well-off child a new breed of school bully