David Farrar over at Kiwiblog has a post about an upcoming seminar on The Green Paper For Vunerable Children. While I am not against such seminars at all (it is good to talk), I fear that any solution will involve Nanny State government intervention, such as the Smacking Law, which did nothing. Below is my comment on Kiwiblog -
As usual, they will address this problem from the wrong end.
They’ll try to look at the symptoms and find a cure through possible government programmes and interventions, without actually looking at the source of the problem – the breakdown of families and the pushing of marriage off to one side as being irrelevant.
Much of modern secular society has a mindset now that sees children as a bad thing.
We have the pill, condoms, and other contraception so we can have all the sex we want without having babies. And if a woman does happen to get pregnant (horror of horrors!) and doesn’t want the baby, we have abortion to kill off that life.
If the mindset is that it’s OK to be violent to children in the womb, then is it really a surprise that that attitude toward all children (albeit unknowingly) is prevalent in society as a whole?
In times past, a baby used to be seen as a blessing – something the whole community celebrated together when a woman fell pregnant. Now with unmarried mothers with boyfriends who have no emotional investment in the child it’s easier for these attacks to occur.
The solution: Bring marriage back as something to be aspired to and honoured. Strengthen the family unit. Encourage in children sexual abstinence until marriage. Welcome children into a marriage instead of seeing them as a hinderence to career etc..
I think if we concentrated on these things, we’d see less child abuse over a period of time (and it would take time for new attitudes to sink in). But it won’t happen: instead we’ll see talking heads yammering about government programmes, and passing new laws – eg, more Nanny State.
We’ve already seen the Smacking Law passed, which didn’t make a damn bit of difference. As I said – it’s concentrating on the symptoms rather than the cause.
As usual, they will address this problem from the wrong end.
They’ll try to look at the symptoms and find a cure through possible government programmes and interventions, without actually looking at the source of the problem – the breakdown of families and the pushing of marriage off to one side as being irrelevant.
Much of modern secular society has a mindset now that sees children as a bad thing.
We have the pill, condoms, and other contraception so we can have all the sex we want without having babies. And if a woman does happen to get pregnant (horror of horrors!) and doesn’t want the baby, we have abortion to kill off that life.
If the mindset is that it’s OK to be violent to children in the womb, then is it really a surprise that that attitude toward all children (albeit unknowingly) is prevalent in society as a whole?
In times past, a baby used to be seen as a blessing – something the whole community celebrated together when a woman fell pregnant. Now with unmarried mothers with boyfriends who have no emotional investment in the child it’s easier for these attacks to occur.
The solution: Bring marriage back as something to be aspired to and honoured. Strengthen the family unit. Encourage in children sexual abstinence until marriage. Welcome children into a marriage instead of seeing them as a hinderence to career etc..
I think if we concentrated on these things, we’d see less child abuse over a period of time (and it would take time for new attitudes to sink in). But it won’t happen: instead we’ll see talking heads yammering about government programmes, and passing new laws – eg, more Nanny State.
We’ve already seen the Smacking Law passed, which didn’t make a damn bit of difference. As I said – it’s concentrating on the symptoms rather than the cause.
As usual, they will address this problem from the wrong end.
ReplyDeleteThey’ll try to look at the symptoms and find a cure through possible government programmes and interventions, without actually looking at the source of the problem – the breakdown of families and the pushing of marriage off to one side as being irrelevant.
Interesting comment, but is it in fact, true? Families have always broken dowm, for a variety of reasons. Sure, there is more divorce now, but is better for a child to grow up with divorced parents or as I did in a house that was filled with arguments and violence? Am I happier now that I live with a woman I love, although we are not married? Or should I have remained in a loveless marriage?
Much of modern secular society has a mindset now that sees children as a bad thing.
And the evidence for that is? You do have evidence for that, don't you? I have 2 children, now adults, and I think they're both great. I also have 3 grandchildren 2 step-grandchildren and another grand child will be born tomorrow and I am looking forward to welcoming him in to the family.
We have the pill, condoms, and other contraception so we can have all the sex we want without having babies.
And this is where the rubber hits the road, isn't it? You just don't like the idea of people having sex! And if they, do then they should be punished, and that punishment will be a baby.
And if a woman does happen to get pregnant (horror of horrors!) and doesn’t want the baby, we have abortion to kill off that life.
Is this a Rick Santorum moment?
"Last Friday, CNN’s Piers Morgan asked Santorum to clarify his reasoning behind such a callous position. Insisting that “it’s not a matter of religious values,” Santorum explained that sexual assault victims should “accept this horribly created” pregnancy because it is “nevertheless a gift in a very broken way” and that, when it comes down to it, a victim just has “to make the best out of a bad situation“:
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/01/23/409242/santorum-to-rape-victims-make-the-best-out-of-a-bad-situation/?mobile=nc
Yes, rape is a gift from god.
If the mindset is that it’s OK to be violent to children in the womb, then is it really a surprise that that attitude toward all children (albeit unknowingly) is prevalent in society as a whole?
ReplyDeleteIn times past, a baby used to be seen as a blessing – something the whole community celebrated together when a woman fell pregnant. Now with unmarried mothers with boyfriends who have no emotional investment in the child it’s easier for these attacks to occur.
My son is not married to his partner. She made a mistake when she was 16, got pregnant to a loser. My son has accepted that boy as if he is his own son. he is 15 now, and looks up to Matt in a way he never could have to his father. In addition, my son and his partner have another 2 wonderful pre-school age boys. What were you saying about "boyfriends who have no emotional investment in the child"? I think that is an easy, cheap shot, but like the rest of your post, is fact free.
The solution: Bring marriage back as something to be aspired to and honoured. Strengthen the family unit. Encourage in children sexual abstinence until marriage. Welcome children into a marriage instead of seeing them as a hinderence to career etc..
Here we go again, you just do not like the idea of people having sex! How does a marriage certificate do anything to strengthen bonds between people? If it isn't there in the beginning how will a bit of paper make it any different?
I think if we concentrated on these things, we’d see less child abuse over a period of time (and it would take time for new attitudes to sink in). But it won’t happen: instead we’ll see talking heads yammering about government programmes, and passing new laws – eg, more Nanny State.
We’ve already seen the Smacking Law passed, which didn’t make a damn bit of difference. As I said – it’s concentrating on the symptoms rather than the cause.
Actually, the "smacking law" has made quite a bit of a difference. Fewer children are being belted by parents who react out of their own anger, not out of love or a desire to instruct. Those who do, are now prosecuted, and rightly so.
This law was never intended to halt the killing of children, we already had a law for that.
LRO, I'm not saying that a single mother can't find a good boyfriend who cares for her child or children as well, but I think a man will always care more about his biological offspring than some other man's child, that sometimes a certain type of guy will find the child a nuisance, and that it is safer for a child (I admit not always, but usually) with his two biological parents. Do I have certain proof? I'd have to look further into it, but there are many examples -
ReplyDelete* Police have arrested Matthew Ellery and charged him with the murder of 6-month-old Serenity Jay Scott-Dinnington. Ellery was the boyfriend of Serenity’s mother Chelsea Scott at the time of Serenity’s death in April last year. Serenity’s injuries included severe brain injuries, a broken rib cage and genital injuries.
* A man has appeared in court accused of murdering two-year-old JJ Lawrence. Joel Loffley, 29, unemployed, of Mangere, appeared before Judge Tony Fitzgerald in the Auckland District Court this morning.
He is understood to have been the boyfriend of JJ’s mother, Josephine Lawrence. He stood quietly in the dock wearing nothing but a prison-issue padded tunic.
* Two year old Harry Waites has been left with just 50% of his normal brain function after having his head slammed against a wall by his mother’s boyfriend [stepdad] Aaron Kenneth Charles Howell, aged 22.
* A 21 year old male [stepfather] has appeared in court charged with the manslaughter of 5 month old Mikara Ranui Jarius Reti.
* Lance Teriwhi Corkery will spend less than five years in jail (actual minimum jail time is 2 years 5 months) for inflicting injuries on a baby that left her in a condition like that of a stroke survivor.
The 39-year-old unemployed Whangarei man “lost it” when his girlfriend’s child, Tinishar Walker, 17 months, was crying. He picked her up, shook her violently and dropped her twice so her head slammed against an open drawer as she fell to the floor.
There's a whole page of them here, all with the "bad boyfriend" tag -
http://bit.ly/ymnYBY
LRO, do you have any evidence that the smacking law has made any difference? 'Smacking' itself has never been "child abuse" or a problem. It's only the people who 'belt' their kids who are the problem, and they will still be doing it.
ReplyDeleteAs far as marriage making a difference, it does. It's not only a sacrament, it's a couple standing up in front of everyone they know - parents, relatives, and friends, and saying we're going to do this - make this commitment to one another in the sight of God, the government, and you all. And because it is so important, the State registers this union.
If it were just “a bit of paper” then why won’t they sign it? It is because it is much more than just a bit of paper. Marriage has been recognized as the building block of society.
In 2005, on the 10th anniversary of the International Year of the Family, the United Nations ratified the DOHA Declaration on the family, that stated in part, “A family composed of a husband, wife and children is the natural, basic element of a society and should be protected by society and by the State;”
ps, Neither I, nor the Church, as any problem with sex. In Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve to "go forth and multiply". It is only when sex is misused (as it often is in secular society) that there is a problem.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a problem with eating either, but I wouldn't do it while trying to ride a bicycle, driving a car in a busy city center, having a shower, lying flat on my back in the middle of the night, etc..
Just because something is good (as sex is), doesn't mean that it is good to do in anywhere and everywhere. Sex is best in the context of marriage because 1) it produces offpsring which are best brought up in the confines of a family, and 2) it draws man and woman closer together - it is a bonding agent.
LRO, I'm not saying that a single mother can't find a good boyfriend who cares for her child or children as well, but I think a man will always care more about his biological offspring than some other man's child
ReplyDeleteAnd in support of this non-argument you post details of a few cases where the non biological father has beena killer. Now, we laready know this is a problem, we already know it has occurred as long as there have been men and women,in fact, it even seems as though the human penis has been designed to scoop pout the seed of a rival.
But what you don't show is what is the proportion of thses occurrences out of all the blended families. And you do not compare with the numbers of children murdered by their biological fathers.
How many stories do you read of the non-bilogical father raisng the children in to well rounded adults?
As far as marriage making a difference, it does. It's not only a sacrament, it's a couple standing up in front of everyone they know - parents, relatives, and friends, and saying we're going to do this - make this commitment to one another in the sight of God, the government, and you all. And because it is so important, the State registers this union.
ReplyDeleteMy daughter is married. No gods were present that day, just Al and Ben, their families and friends.
The State's interest is that marriage is a contract.
... United Nations ratified the DOHA Declaration ...
ReplyDeleteHmm, don't you usually slag off at the UN?
I think you will find it is Doha, not DOHA. It is not an acronym, it is a city in Qatar. If you want credibility, get the terms right.
Neither I, nor the Church, as any problem with sex. In Genesis, God tells Adam and Eve to "go forth and multiply". It is only when sex is misused (as it often is in secular society) that there is a problem.
ReplyDeleteReference to a fairy tale does nothing to advance your argument.
However, I do note that in that fairytale there is no specific reference to marriage.
Just how is sex "misused"? I wasn't aware it could be misused.
I think you need to lift your eyes from the Bronze Age and look to today.
I thank God for my FOUR children and I was shafted by evil court system who got things wrong. Who cares when people get child abuse things wrong. How do you fix that Justice Minister or twisted judge filth?
ReplyDeleteGod will avenge in due time.
Is this a Rick Santorum moment?
ReplyDeletehttp://vimeo.com/35928068
um, no.
you post details of a few cases where the non biological father has beena killer
LRO = 1, IMFletcher = 5.
Checking the math.....yep 5 is greater than 1.
I did't believe in gods, but God. Have you made a new religion or just referred to one that isn't Christian? Either way it sorta nullifies your point in this context.
This guy ended up getting 2 years and nine months
ReplyDeletesee http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/8540742/Father-prays-for-man-who-left-son-disabled
it did not say about minimum non parole period but probably 2/3rds of this so in effect 20 months.
We will always have animals like this, however as long as judges are using the wet bus ticket, they are in effect saying that this behavior is OK as there will be very little consequences. The problem are the judges/lawyers and do-gooders cheering them on, most of which have a vested financial interest in recycling criminals through the system as many times as possible.
MisterEd,
ReplyDeleteI hadn't seen that story. The poor little boy. The problem is very much also that which Fletch didn't talk about in his post - man wasn't married to the boy's mother. Unrelated and unmarried "partners" of childrens' mothers are the most dangerous people in their lives.