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-511 |
CADRP-511 |
About you
Individual
— No
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
1. It is unnecessary – the present law is already sufficient to prosecute people who abuse their children.
2. It is a distraction from the desperate need to protect many children who are really at risk of neglect, cruelty and violence.
3. There is no evidence that light smacks have any detrimental effect on children.
4. It is state interference with family life and I fear that it could lead to further state interference in other matters.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
No.
1. Violent assaults on children are already against the law.
2. Regarding a smack within a caring relationship as being equally criminal to a violent assault will only cause confusion.
3. There is a need to protect genuinely abused children. But this legislation will inevitably lead to the re-directing of the already stretched resources to persecute ordinary, caring and otherwise law abiding families - to the detriment not only of those families but also of the really needy children.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
If the legislation genuinely intends for everyone who smacks their child to be prosecuted and labelled as a criminal, the state will need to recruit a vast army of spies and informers, as well as many more social workers and police officers.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
No.It is the product of a determined elite who pay no attention to the views of ordinary people whom they claim to represent.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
Many consequences, disastrous for family life:
1. Giving otherwise law abiding, ordinary, caring parents criminal records.
2. This leads to the strong possibility that such parents will lose their own jobs. I believe the NHS has already stated that smacking would be treated as child abuse. I expect a similar stance could be taken against parents who are employed in education or law enforcement.
3. If parents are investigated, even if they are not finally prosecuted; or if they are prosecuted but found not guilty, they are likely to be suspended from their jobs for many months or even years.
4. Even a false or spurious report must be investigated – during which time a parent might be suspended from their job and a whole family overshadowed by anxiety.
5. The previous point shows how easily the legislation could be used maliciously. Get revenge against a neighbour, or a colleague, or even one’s own parent by making a false claim.
6. The miserable prospect of children being turned, unwittingly, into state informers against their own parents. For example, a child’s innocent remark to a teacher has to be reported to social services; social services pass it on to the police.
7. This legislation will put conscientious and law abiding parents into a dilemma. Shall they continue to do what they believe is right but in so doing deliberately break the law?
8. The resources of schools, social services and the police are already stretched to the limit. The proposed legislation will create an unnecessary distraction from their more important tasks.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
Justice will become subservient to budgetary constraints: Pursuing honest and otherwise law abiding people will be easier [and so cheaper] than trying to collect evidence against really violent but devious offenders.
(we would be grateful if you could keep your answer to around 1000 words)
I wonder how the authorities will cope with such an increase in investigations and prosecutions of people who would never otherwise be in trouble with the law.
But perhaps the intention is to make a high profile case against one or two unfortunate victims for prosecution, in order to frighten everyone else into submission. How unjust!
Frighteningly reminiscent of the totalitarian governments of the twentieth century.