Consultation on the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill
|
Tystiolaeth i’r Pwyllgor Plant, Pobl Ifanc ac Addysg ar gyfer craffu Cyfnod 1 Bil Plant (Diddymu Amddiffyniad Cosb Resymol) (Cymru) |
Evidence submitted to the Children, Young People and Education Committee for Stage 1 scrutiny of the Children (Abolition of Defence of Reasonable Punishment) (Wales) Bill |
|
CADRP-298 |
CADRP-298 |
About you
Name: Ian Hassall
Role: Independent Children’s Advocate
— Yes
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
As New Zealand's first Children's Commissioner and later as an independent children's advocate I was a prime mover in the successful campaign to pass similar legislation in New Zealand (Crimes [Substituted Section 59] Amendment Act 2007). My experience in that role has recently been published (Hassall, I. [2019] New Zealand's landmark law change to prohibit corporal punishment of children, In, Saunders, B., Leviner, P., Naylor, B. (Eds.) Corporal punishment of children: Comparative legal and social developments towards prohibition and beyond. Leiden: Brill: Nijhoff).
I have had brought to my attention misleading material that seeks to undermine confidence in the law change, that has been circulated in Scotland, Wales and Canada. It purports to show that there have been ill-effects from the 2007 New Zealand legislation, for which there is no sound evidence. In particular, it suggests that:1. Good parents have been unjustly persecuted, 2. Children's behaviour has deteriorated. 3. There is public clamour to reverse the effects of the law change. 4. There has been no improvement in the child abuse statistics. There is no evidence to support the first and third of these assertions. On the contrary, police and child protection and survey data show no misapplication of the law and an increasing support for the legislation. In relation to the second assertion there is no evidence one way or the other and it would be difficult to imagine data that would illuminate such a general question as children's behaviour. On the fourth assertion it was never anticipated that the law change would in the short term reduce child abuse. The origins of child maltreatment are complex. Societal and attitudinal changes that may result from the legislation may well, in time, lead to a reduction.
My reason for taking an interest in what the Welsh Assembly decides is my experience that our global world supports or fails to support children's interests and well-being as a whole. What happens in Wales is important for New Zealand and for every other country.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
Yes. The existing legislation that permits hitting children is a serious obstacle to respect for them, at least in the minds and behaviour of some. Respect for children and indeed respect for all family members is a pre-requisite for domestic harmony and reduction of family violence. Research shows a co-existence of violence to partners and to children.
It can be forgotten unless children are involved in discussions surrounding this issue that being hit hurts and is humiliating. The question must be asked, 'why should we wish to inflict pain on the people we love?'.
Public education is sometimes cited as an alternative to legislative change but it should be seen as an addition. It does not address the first point above. The law is powerful in setting a standard.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
-
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
-
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
-
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
-
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
-