There is currently a referendum in progress in New Zealand, it is in relation to a fairly recent law change that modified the Crimes Act with regard to smacking, basically. The referendum question posed is “Should a smack, as part of good parental correction, be a criminal offense in New Zealand” which myself and many others feel is an absurd question.
To protest this referendum, mainly the question, I created a website called ‘Should-A‘ which allows people to create alternate versions of the question. From that site I’ve received a few emails about the issue. Today I felt compelled to reply in some detail to one, which I will reproduce here as I feel it sums up my feelings on the issue quite well.
To: Dylan
Subject: Should-A Feedback
From: Geofrey — <–@gmail.com>“However the wording they chose makes a mockery of the process.”
I initially considered this suggestion but upon reflection have realised the opposite, there is absolutely no ambiguity or confusion in the referendum wording, it is very simple and the only reasonable response to that question is no; “Should a smack, as part of parental correction, be a criminal offence?” – of course it shouldn’t be a criminal offence, it’s ridiculous to answer yes to that question, irrespective of the crimes act, section 59, or the intended purpose of the referendum. It is unreasonable and a very bad law if a parent smacking a child for the right reasons, is criminalised, such would simply not be proper justice.
My reply…
Hi Geofrey,
You’re right most people wouldn’t want to criminalise a parent for ’smacking a child for the right reasons’ – although the debate about whether the right reasons exist could be had. The fact is though that there is very little evidence that this is actually happening. I’ve not seen any examples yet of someone prosecuted for what turns out to be what we’d all agree is a simple smack.
There is an argument that the law makes it a crime, therefore criminalising parents even if they are investigated or prosecuted. However, it has always been an offense to assault a child (which is what a smack amounts to, in law) it’s just that previously there was a prescribed defense in law. Also, by that argument anyway we’d all be criminalised often – for driving too fast, or common assault, or all manner of other things that we do daily that by the letter of the law would be a criminal offense. Yet I would equally oppose a referendum asking “Should travelling above the posted speed limit, as part of good driving, be a criminal offense in New Zealand” – yes, simply it should. Should we expect that every person who does so will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of that law? No.
The current law presents a number of situations in which a smack shouldn’t be considered an offense – which realistically cover pretty much every example that presented. And beyond that the police are specifically given discretionary powers in enforcing the law (which is somewhat redundant, as the police exercise discretion is enforcing most laws) – it is incredibly hard to imagine a scenario in which the ‘light smack on the hand or bottom’ that the “Vote No” spokespeople publicly discuss would result in arrest and prosecution.
Another problem I have with the referendum, and specifically the people promoting the No vote, is that they present no alternative. All that’s suggested is that the current law is no good. No better option is suggest (the Boscowan bill hardly seems like a complete alternative). Publicly they say they support a ‘light smack’ and that being more aggressive, or using implements is unreasonable – and yet there’s no consideration about how that would be enforced? Presumably they’d have an option where allegations of that sort of conduct would be investigated by the police, who would look at the basic situation and decide whether further action was necessary, and if it was then the case would move to the court, where again it would be examined to see if there was grounds to proceed, and if there was then it would enter the court process. Sounds very familiar.
Fundamentally the problem is there is no was to define in law when a smack is ‘good’ and when it’s ‘bad’. Instead you do as the law does in most cases and outline general principles and trust that the people empowered to enforce law will apply those principle to the cases as they arise – that is the police and courts.
That summerises my feelings on the issue.
Personally as a parent of two, I do not believe smacking to be necessary or beneficial at all and will not use it regardless of the law.
That’s it pretty much.
Nice one, Dylz.
I’ve just had a thought about the question:
“Should a smack, as part of good parental correction, be a criminal offense in New Zealand” – it doesn’t say anything about the age of the children receiving the hallowed smack as part of good parental correction.
Does this mean that my mum could smack my botty as punishment for not providing her with any grandchildren?
That’s part of the ambiguity of it all really. No details about how a smack should be lawfully applied.
Is a smack child abuse? That is where the confusion lies, like is abortion killing.. the courts have decided a week term.. its not perfect but its an answer.
Some parents smack for the right reasons, some don’t. That is what the courts are really after, not as a punishment but as a deterrent.
Dylan, its good to raise it as a proper issue but if there is one thing that I have come across this entire fiasco is people are talking about it. As a parent, my job is protect my kids, fully and wholeheartedly and unconditionally. For me that might mean a smack for reasons that I may not be able to intellectualize to a court. Parenting is not perfect and not easy but it is a duty and anyone is a fool to think time out alone is perfect for all instances for all children.
My kids don’t get smacked but they are a long way off from abuse, I would only hope that police have the law on their side when a child arrives in emergency all smacked up, but I actually think in that case they do.
Cheers mate
Yves
Hey Yves,
The original law change was motivated by cases where real cases of abuse were sucessfully defended on ‘reasonable correction’ grounds.
In essence I don’t believe the law should make specific blanket exceptions like Section 59 used to.
Is a smack illegal? Technically yes, but it always was. Only before the grounds under which it might be deemed justifiable were a lot more broad. Like any law however it relies of the police and other agencies to enforce it. It’s at that level (and in the courts) that individual cases can be examined.
It simply isn’t possible to agree on what an okay smack actually is, let alone legislate that. The referendum’s initiators simply don’t confront that issue. They come up with a million scenarios in which good parents might be criminalised, but offer no solution to that, simply deride the law they think might cause it.
If you smack your kid on the bum in a reasonable way as the immediate and undersood consequence of some misdeed, and then are arrested and charged, then I will defend you and call for policy change (in the policing of the law) – but at this stage I think the chances of that happening are incredibly close to zero.
I’ll get the disclaimer out the way first: I don’t have kids, but they’re probably on the agenda some day.
My biggest concern is that when you start defining circumstances such as this (even as ambiguous as the question is), it starts to make room for loopholes. Abuse is abuse, and if warranted, should be punished in a way that I hope our judicial system has the common sense to apply. We have judges to deal with the ethics of applying these laws, though they are supposed to take guidance from politically appointed (not elected) Chief Justice – one who has just said we may as well release prisoners into society earlier as prisons don’t work.
There are no consequences to any actions in this country. The only (I think?) case prosecuted resulted in nine months supervision and a anger management course. You can kill your wife, dump her in the boot, ditch the kid, and only get 12 years.
You can drive drunk and lose your license for six months. This doesn’t stop them from doing it again.
All I feel the anti-smacking law is going to do is making it easier for some snotty Sue Bradford know it all to dob someone else in. Good parents who see another parent giving an appropriate smack are more likely to give a knowing wink than dial 111. I hope that if any New Zealand citizen witnesses anyone actually abusing ANYONE will report it.
Maybe I’ve contradicted myself anyway? Maybe we should report everything we see, and let an overworked (over complicated?) law system process everything we do, and hand out a slap on the wrist and a public embarrassment in the media.
I was going to rant about how ‘bad’ the kids are these days, but I figured this wasn’t the place
Instead I’m ranting about the legal system in general!
Hi Dylan, I think it shouldn’t be a criminal offense in New Zealand or any other country.
I’m from Dominican Republic, and smacking children is a tradition that has been for generations. When a child (18 and under) does something bad, like stealing, not doing homework, bad grades, etc, it’s normal they get smacked. Specially when you disrespect your father, mother, or any older member of the family or friends. This punishment or smacking teach them that anything bad they do, has bad consequences.
Smacking teach the person how to be responsible and educated. In most school, teachers are considered our second fathers and mothers. They have the right to smack you if you misbehave or do something bad. I was in a catholic school. And after recess if you don’t have clean hands, the teacher will smack you with a ruler. That “fear” of not getting smacked teaches us always wash our hands. Also, it teaches us to respect them as if they were our parents. If you misbehave with a teacher, they will call your parents. And you better be prepared.
Parents don’t like or enjoy smacking their children. In fact, one of the most used lines from our parents before our beating was “Trust me, this will hurt me more than you.” Right there, you don’t understand what that means (you are getting smacked, remember?), but when you are an adult you understand perfectly that our parents did it for our best interest. Let’s say your father is beating you up because you stole money. Until your father don’t hear you saying with tears in your eyes, something like “I won’t do it again, I promise”, he wouldn’t stop. Some parents beat you so hard, so not even through you mind pass the thought of doing it again. And it works, because in fact, you never do it again.
Abuses are intolerable. There’s a difference between correcting and abusing. If you smack, hit, beat, or punish a child for no reason, because it cries a lot, because he’s hungry, because has lot of energy, because he’s curious and break something trying to touch it, etc, it’s intolerable, illegal and it’s a criminal offense. The smacking only is necessary if you did something really bad. In fact, you don’t get a beating right away. Parents talk to you about what you did and might let you go the first time. But if you repeat, then you were asking for it.
You know the best part of our culture of smacking? that it works. You can ask any men or women smacked when they were little, and they will all agree that it helped them to be a better person. No trauma or stuff like that. They understand why their parents did it. And the bond between them it’s much better.
I live in New York right now. And here it’s illegal to smack a child. The reason why most kids misbehave is because they don’t have control. Sometimes you can get a child respect you by talking. But when that doesn’t work, action is necessary. But since they are little, the school teaches them that their parents can’t touch them. And that’s giving the child power over their parents. It’s normal for kids to threat their parents they will call the police. Being soft with them only makes matter worse. I’m sure a good smack will make most kids in NY respect their parents.
Like always, it’s much better to try to resolve anything by talking. But when that doesn’t work, I think a parent should do whatever is necessary to put their child in the correct path.
Juan