• Full Story

Police: anti-smacking law working well

Print

Thu, 30 Sep 2010 11:26a.m. UPDATED: 1:45PM

The only prosecution for smacking didn't result in a conviction

The only prosecution for smacking didn't result in a conviction

By Dan Satherley

Only one person was prosecuted for smacking in the 16 months to June 2010 under the so-called 'anti-smacking law' – and the case ended with the accused discharged, without conviction.

Police today revealed the findings of their latest review of the Crimes (Substituted s59) Amendment Act 2007, covering the period December 23, 2009, to June 22, 2010.

Of 416 child assaults attended by police considered under the review, 25 involved "smacking" and 38 "minor acts of physical discipline".

Of the smacking events, 13 people were warned and 11 had no further action taken. Only one resulted in a prosecution for Child Assualt (Manually), and did not result in a conviction.

Of the 38 acts of physical discipline, only two resulted in prosecution. Twelve people were warned, and 24 had no action taken.

"The findings of this review are consistent with our previous monitoring," says Deputy Commissioner Rob Pope.

"It shows police continue to apply their discretion in these cases.

"There have been just three prosecutions for smacking events since the Amendment was enacted in June 2007. This suggests the practice guidelines on this matter issued by the Commissioner continue to work well".

The amendment was introduced by former Greens MP Sue Bradford.

Family First director Bob McCoskrie rubbished the report, saying it trivialised "the real impact" of the law.

"What these figures do show is that almost 350 families have gone through the trauma of an investigation, temporary removal of children, and potential court case for a smack or minor act of physical discipline, and 19 of these families have been taken to court,” says Mr McCoskrie.

"Family First is aware of a number of more recent cases where parents have been investigated, prosecuted and/or had children removed for removing children to time out, or using reasonable force to deal with defiant behaviour and tantrums.

"They continue to ignore the reality of parenting.”

Auckland mayoral candidate Colin Craig was the financial backer of last year's march against the law change. He declined to comment on the police review, but said it doesn't change the fact 87 percent voted 'no' in the controversially-worded referendum, asking, 'Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?'.

"When over 87 percent of voters voted for a change to the anti-smacking law they have the right to see that happen," says Mr Craig,

"Nothing has changed – it is still about the voters getting what they actually want."

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

07 Dec 2010 01:18p.m.

Sheesh wrote:

I'm absolutely gob-smacked that a government can just ignore a referendum and get away with it!

03 Oct 2010 03:51p.m.

David wrote:

I've seen and heard the results of this preposterous piece of legislation for myself, such as parents being forced to bribe their kids into doing what they're told. Scrap this legislation, and bring in a government that listens to the people rather than cram socially liberal policies and viewpoints down people's necks.

02 Oct 2010 05:02a.m.

jan.. wrote:

Teachers are their next level in life until adulthood and teacher's has a very big part in children growing-up, apart from parent's, teachers, doctor and nurses, they cared the same way..
The teachers used to cared in everyway needed countable for teach, careing, take note of the children's behaviour, honeslty teachers used to work in all areas where children are concern, but they don't have the right to molesting any child..
Child abused should be shot on the spot along with the murderer..

01 Oct 2010 06:40p.m.

Liberator wrote:

I despise the state's attempts at playing surragate parent. 30 years of a similar law in Sweden, and the rate of child abuse has anything but abated, in fact, it has increased substationaly since then. The message should be loud and clear - You attack good parents, then you attack children. So, what makes us think that this law is going to make any difference to anything? If parents choose not to smack their children, that's one thing. But to have a law that prosecutes decent, caring parents for a harmless smack is absolutely stupid. It achieves nothing expect satisfy the attitudes of idealogues. Oh, yes- "If you smack, you are bad parent no matter what." See what I mean? it's just an attitude.

01 Oct 2010 09:52a.m.

ivan wrote:

i support the anti smacking bill

30 Sep 2010 06:32p.m.

dave wrote:

To liken giving your child a smack on the bum out of love to child assault is outrageous

30 Sep 2010 04:31p.m.

Lightseed wrote:

Katraina, use common sense, this law was not meant to stop children being murdered. It was meant as one of many tools to get to children who needed intervention to help them. It was also stated it would be a decade before we start to see the outcome of this law, but some of you people expect a law to change and the world to be alright within moments.

30 Sep 2010 01:50p.m.

katrina wrote:

It hasn't stopped the little ones being murdered though and that was I thought the main goal. Most abuse of a child by parents is an emotional one. It is a severe reaction to an out of control situation caused by stress and tiredness. The threat of prosecution is not going to stop this from happening.
Education and support would go a lot further.
Grandparents who play an active role in the lives of their children and grandchildren would help too.

30 Sep 2010 12:53p.m.

Lightseed wrote:

Really Cyril? We have had a problem with youth crime, substance abuse in this country since long before this legislation was passed. Fact is all the children and teenagers that are having problems were raised in a time before this legislation was passed when smacking was legal. Guess the problem isn't that you cannot smack a child then huh, otherwise those children would be law abiding citizens under your theory.

30 Sep 2010 11:57a.m.

cyril wrote:

And in the meantime our kids become more unrully, undisaplined and out of control with youth crime, alchol and substance abuse going through the roof. Yes its working well