Women’s Refuge, thirty years established in New Zealand, is widely assumed to be universally respected, and to be the only such agency offering help, counselling and accommodation to victims of family violence. In N.Z. it holds an annual Appeal Week every June, complete with much innovative, and even at times highly questionable, media coverage and celebrity support.
Yet all is far from being what it seems with Women’s Refuge, and many have had deep concerns about its operation and huge amounts of public funding, and even long before this most recent call to have it greatly boosted.
Read this recent article by Barbara Faithfull: Public Enquiry Overdue: Let’s Start With Women’s Refuge
Saturday, November 27, 2004
1 in 3 women beaten by partner
One in three women will face violence from their partners in their lifetime, and the experience will cause long-term health problems, a study has found.
The University of Auckland study suggests New Zealand has a higher domestic violence rate than the United States of America or Australia.
A second study, by Auckland University of Technology (AUT) researchers, published yesterday found that 44 per cent of women interviewed at an Auckland emergency ward had suffered partner violence in their lives, and one in five had been victims of partner violence in the past year. The statistics have prompted fresh pleas for early intervention by doctors.
The first study involved 2855 women aged 18 to 64 in Auckland and Waikato. It found 15 per cent of women had suffered physical abuse from someone they are not in a relationship with, while 10 per cent will face sexual violence from a man they are not involved with.
“We teach women to fear walking into dark alleys and (violence) by strangers, but the biggest risk for women is violence from their partners,” said researcher Dr Janet Fanslow.
“These are very worrying statistics. As men we should be ashamed,” said Brian Gardner, national manager of the National Network of Stopping Violence Services.
“As a man in New Zealand I feel sad and ashamed that so many men are beating, abusing and killing their partners. That’s not how to support and care for those close to us.”
Christchurch Women’s Refuge manager Annette Gillespie said … it was important to remember that physical abuse also included things such as pinching, restraining, pulling and flicking. “And these will be surrounded by a whole lot of other abusive tactics.”
The University of Auckland study suggests New Zealand has a higher domestic violence rate than the United States of America or Australia.
A second study, by Auckland University of Technology (AUT) researchers, published yesterday found that 44 per cent of women interviewed at an Auckland emergency ward had suffered partner violence in their lives, and one in five had been victims of partner violence in the past year. The statistics have prompted fresh pleas for early intervention by doctors.
The first study involved 2855 women aged 18 to 64 in Auckland and Waikato. It found 15 per cent of women had suffered physical abuse from someone they are not in a relationship with, while 10 per cent will face sexual violence from a man they are not involved with.
“We teach women to fear walking into dark alleys and (violence) by strangers, but the biggest risk for women is violence from their partners,” said researcher Dr Janet Fanslow.
“These are very worrying statistics. As men we should be ashamed,” said Brian Gardner, national manager of the National Network of Stopping Violence Services.
“As a man in New Zealand I feel sad and ashamed that so many men are beating, abusing and killing their partners. That’s not how to support and care for those close to us.”
Christchurch Women’s Refuge manager Annette Gillespie said … it was important to remember that physical abuse also included things such as pinching, restraining, pulling and flicking. “And these will be surrounded by a whole lot of other abusive tactics.”
Study confirms family violence is common in New Zealand
National News Release 9:01am 26 November 2004
Police have welcomed the findings of Auckland University’s research ‘Violence against women in New Zealand: prevalence and health consequences, says Inspector Rob Veale, Violence Reduction Manager.
“The report concludes violence is a common experience in the lives of women, and women are more at risk of experiencing violence from their partners than from other perpetrators,” he says.
Mr Veale said the report released today highlights concerns not just for police but for all communities in New Zealand.
“The first step in reducing violence in homes begins with a change of mind. Domestic violence survives when there is silence – when people believe that it’s private and personal, that it’s not their business.”
Mr Veale says police have always been on the front line when it comes to dealing with family violence. Police have a pro-arrest approach to family violence whenever they find evidence of an offence. “We are continuing to improve our understanding and response to family violence. Police have a number of initiatives in place, including training and improved methods of gathering evidence and identifying risk indicators, which helps Police assess the safety of people who may have been affected by the violence they may have experienced or witnessed.
“Police are committed to reducing family violence and we need the community alongside us to make it happen,” says Mr Veale.
Ends
Police have welcomed the findings of Auckland University’s research ‘Violence against women in New Zealand: prevalence and health consequences, says Inspector Rob Veale, Violence Reduction Manager.
“The report concludes violence is a common experience in the lives of women, and women are more at risk of experiencing violence from their partners than from other perpetrators,” he says.
Mr Veale said the report released today highlights concerns not just for police but for all communities in New Zealand.
“The first step in reducing violence in homes begins with a change of mind. Domestic violence survives when there is silence – when people believe that it’s private and personal, that it’s not their business.”
Mr Veale says police have always been on the front line when it comes to dealing with family violence. Police have a pro-arrest approach to family violence whenever they find evidence of an offence. “We are continuing to improve our understanding and response to family violence. Police have a number of initiatives in place, including training and improved methods of gathering evidence and identifying risk indicators, which helps Police assess the safety of people who may have been affected by the violence they may have experienced or witnessed.
“Police are committed to reducing family violence and we need the community alongside us to make it happen,” says Mr Veale.
Ends
Domestic abuse study ‘misleading’
A study which found that one third of women are physically or sexually abused by their partners is part of a misleading campaign, a men’s umbrella group representative says.
“The ongoing campaign seems to deny the existence of domestic violence of women against men,” Christchurch Men and Fathers’ Network facilitator, Don Rowlands, said.
University of Canterbury associate sociology professor Greg Newbold said the report should have also addressed violence against male partners.
“It’s not enough to say, yes, he assaulted me. Reports from New Zealand show that women commit low-level assaults more frequently.”
Profile given to domestic violence by the study could be dangerous. “Especially like this when men are not included. It gives rise to uninformed opinions.”
Spokeswoman for the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges, Janet Lake, did not accept that domestic violence against men was as serious as that for women.
Bryce Hawkins, of support and personal development group MensTrust, said that anecdotally he was aware of a high incidence of women abusing men in Christchurch.
“A lot of this research comes out as if men are the big monsters.”
Auckland University senior lecturer in general practice and primary health care, Dr Felicity Goodyear (sic; should be Goodyear-Smith), said doctors should keep in mind that male patients might be victims of domestic abuse. “It can have a huge psychological effect on male patients.”
Women’s Refuge spokeswoman Cheryl Hann says the study proves what they already suspected.
Ms Hann says it is sad the statistics have been confirmed but it is a good wake-up call.
“The ongoing campaign seems to deny the existence of domestic violence of women against men,” Christchurch Men and Fathers’ Network facilitator, Don Rowlands, said.
University of Canterbury associate sociology professor Greg Newbold said the report should have also addressed violence against male partners.
“It’s not enough to say, yes, he assaulted me. Reports from New Zealand show that women commit low-level assaults more frequently.”
Profile given to domestic violence by the study could be dangerous. “Especially like this when men are not included. It gives rise to uninformed opinions.”
Spokeswoman for the National Collective of Independent Women’s Refuges, Janet Lake, did not accept that domestic violence against men was as serious as that for women.
Bryce Hawkins, of support and personal development group MensTrust, said that anecdotally he was aware of a high incidence of women abusing men in Christchurch.
“A lot of this research comes out as if men are the big monsters.”
Auckland University senior lecturer in general practice and primary health care, Dr Felicity Goodyear (sic; should be Goodyear-Smith), said doctors should keep in mind that male patients might be victims of domestic abuse. “It can have a huge psychological effect on male patients.”
Women’s Refuge spokeswoman Cheryl Hann says the study proves what they already suspected.
Ms Hann says it is sad the statistics have been confirmed but it is a good wake-up call.
Saturday, November 20, 2004
Pacific Island women and domestic violence
Intimate Partner Violence within a cohort of Pacific mothers living in New Zealand
Reducing violence by Pacific peoples has been identified by Pacific communities and government agencies as an important issue. However, there is little research into the nature of intimate partner relationships among Pacific families living in New Zealand.
This study reports the 12-month estimated prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) experienced by a cohort of Pacific mothers living in New Zealand. The Conflict Tactics Scale was completed by 1,095 women who had given birth in the past 12 months, and who were married or living with a partner as married.
The 12-month prevalence of “victimization” through verbal aggression was 77%, 21% for “minor” physical violence, and 11% for “severe” physical violence.
The 12-month prevalence of “perpetration” of verbal aggression against a partner was 90%, 35% for “minor” physical violence, and 19% for “severe” violence towards their partner.
Intimate Partner Violence within a cohort of Pacific mothers living in New Zealand
Reducing violence by Pacific peoples has been identified by Pacific communities and government agencies as an important issue. However, there is little research into the nature of intimate partner relationships among Pacific families living in New Zealand.
This study reports the 12-month estimated prevalence of intimate partner violence (IPV) experienced by a cohort of Pacific mothers living in New Zealand. The Conflict Tactics Scale was completed by 1,095 women who had given birth in the past 12 months, and who were married or living with a partner as married.
The 12-month prevalence of “victimization” through verbal aggression was 77%, 21% for “minor” physical violence, and 11% for “severe” physical violence.
The 12-month prevalence of “perpetration” of verbal aggression against a partner was 90%, 35% for “minor” physical violence, and 19% for “severe” violence towards their partner.
Friday, November 12, 2004
Family court judges won't edit media reports - top judge
11 November 2004
Principal Family Court Judge Peter Boshier has moved to allay fears held by journalists that his judges will misuse their power to vet media stories.
Last month the Government announced that Family Court proceedings would be opened to the public and media with tight restrictions in place.
One proposed restriction strongly opposed by journalists was the power for judges to demand to see stories before publication.
Commonwealth Press Union (CPU) New Zealand chairman Gavin Ellis said "the suggestion that journalists should give up their copy to judges for vetting is totally unacceptable.
"It casts judges in the role of editor. That is unacceptable, it is a form of censorship."
Judge Boshier has written to Mr Ellis over those concerns.
"There has been a view expressed by media that judges are to be given the power to vet or censor journalists' copy in reporting on Family Court proceedings," he wrote.
"This is a misapprehension of what is proposed."
Judge Boshier said it was proposed that journalists would be able to report proceedings as of right, subject to the exclusion of details identifying parties or children.
It was also proposed that in some circumstances the media could apply for leave to publish some of those details.
That was likely to occur in cases in which the identity of the parties would be of significant public interest, he said.
"However, it is also likely that when children are involved the court will make orders protecting their privacy," he said.
"In those circumstances the judge would want to be able to ascertain that the orders have been complied with before publication - and for no other reason.
"This is to ensure that the children's rights have been protected - if such details are published then privacy is lost and cannot be regained.
"It may also assist the media in avoiding a contempt through breaching the orders."
"I do not see the proposed legislation as an attempt to muzzle the media or prevent them from doing their job," Judge Boshier said.
"The judges want no say in the content of media reports but only the opportunity to ascertain that any orders made with regard to non-publication of certain details are complied with."
The Government said the changes were designed to improve transparency without compromising proceedings.
Media and others could attend hearings with the judge's permission, while involved parties could ask for outsiders to be excluded.
Judges could direct that draft news reports be submitted to the court to check they complied with court directions.
Any breach of those directions would mean individuals were liable of three months' imprisonment or a $2000 fine and organisations up to $10,000 in fines.
Associate Justice Minister David Benson-Pope said broader publication would give a clearer picture of the court, but "strict guidelines" would be put in place.
Principal Family Court Judge Peter Boshier has moved to allay fears held by journalists that his judges will misuse their power to vet media stories.
Last month the Government announced that Family Court proceedings would be opened to the public and media with tight restrictions in place.
One proposed restriction strongly opposed by journalists was the power for judges to demand to see stories before publication.
Commonwealth Press Union (CPU) New Zealand chairman Gavin Ellis said "the suggestion that journalists should give up their copy to judges for vetting is totally unacceptable.
"It casts judges in the role of editor. That is unacceptable, it is a form of censorship."
Judge Boshier has written to Mr Ellis over those concerns.
"There has been a view expressed by media that judges are to be given the power to vet or censor journalists' copy in reporting on Family Court proceedings," he wrote.
"This is a misapprehension of what is proposed."
Judge Boshier said it was proposed that journalists would be able to report proceedings as of right, subject to the exclusion of details identifying parties or children.
It was also proposed that in some circumstances the media could apply for leave to publish some of those details.
That was likely to occur in cases in which the identity of the parties would be of significant public interest, he said.
"However, it is also likely that when children are involved the court will make orders protecting their privacy," he said.
"In those circumstances the judge would want to be able to ascertain that the orders have been complied with before publication - and for no other reason.
"This is to ensure that the children's rights have been protected - if such details are published then privacy is lost and cannot be regained.
"It may also assist the media in avoiding a contempt through breaching the orders."
"I do not see the proposed legislation as an attempt to muzzle the media or prevent them from doing their job," Judge Boshier said.
"The judges want no say in the content of media reports but only the opportunity to ascertain that any orders made with regard to non-publication of certain details are complied with."
The Government said the changes were designed to improve transparency without compromising proceedings.
Media and others could attend hearings with the judge's permission, while involved parties could ask for outsiders to be excluded.
Judges could direct that draft news reports be submitted to the court to check they complied with court directions.
Any breach of those directions would mean individuals were liable of three months' imprisonment or a $2000 fine and organisations up to $10,000 in fines.
Associate Justice Minister David Benson-Pope said broader publication would give a clearer picture of the court, but "strict guidelines" would be put in place.
Saturday, November 06, 2004
Father on run for days with daughter
Father on run for days with daughter
06.11.2004
By LOUISA CLEAVE
Lapana Seve had been on the run with his 4-year-old daughter for three days before she was found murdered in the back seat of his car beside Auckland's Northwestern Motorway.
Mr Seve, 45, picked up daughter Storm Apera-Seve from his estranged wife's Grey Lynn home on Friday and was supposed to take her back on Sunday night.
Storm was due at pre-school on Monday morning and her mother desperately tried to contact Mr Seve.
She went several times to his home and left notes for him.
The little girl was found dead in the back seat of her father's car on Wednesday afternoon.
Mr Seve abandoned the car and died when he stepped in front of a truck in heavy rush-hour traffic on the Northwestern.
Police are treating Storm's death as a homicide, but are not looking for anyone else in connection with the killing.
It emerged yesterday that Mr Seve had not returned Storm after weekend visits on other occasions.
Mr Seve had weekend custody of his daughter, but is believed to have wanted full custody.
"He's been quite wrapped up in his daughter, quite obsessed with his daughter ... wanting her with him all the time," said Detective Sergeant Megan Goldie.
Storm's mother did not contact police when he failed to return the preschooler.
"She did not have concerns for the child's welfare, as such," said Ms Goldie, "more that she wanted her back. She was supposed to be at pre-school on Monday."
John McKeown, a friend of Mr Seve for 15 years, said Storm's parents split about a year ago and a problem had developed over custody.
"I gather he wanted to look after her and his parents were talking about helping him look after her," he said.
Police have examined an area of the Avondale Racecourse where Mr Seve and Storm are thought to have slept rough in his car.
Ms Goldie said Mr Seve was seen there on Wednesday and in the days before his death on the motorway.
Storm was seen with him earlier in the week, but was not seen on Wednesday, said Ms Goldie.
Tests are being carried out on patches in the parking area which may be blood stains.
Police cannot yet say when Storm died and have not revealed the cause of death, although it is understood she had stab wounds.
A forensic examination of Mr Seve's vehicle has been completed.
Ms Goldie said police were not looking for a weapon. "We think we have what we need in the car."
Members of the Richmond Rovers Rugby League Club last night gathered in Grey Lynn to remember Mr Seve, a coach, referee and player they knew by the nickname "Squash".
Friends said Mr Seve was devastated by the death of his close friend Afi Ah Kuoi from cancer last May.
Mr Ah Kuoi died two years after losing his wife, and Mr Seve was close to the couple.
"He was very close with the family, then when this custody thing came up, maybe it was the final straw for him and he just cracked," Mr McKeown said.
George Apelu-Tumaseve, who had known Mr Seve for 30 years, told 3News last night that any custody battle "would have tipped him over the edge, if it happened that he'd lost custody of Storm, knowing how close he was to Storm ... She was the apple of his eye".
06.11.2004
By LOUISA CLEAVE
Lapana Seve had been on the run with his 4-year-old daughter for three days before she was found murdered in the back seat of his car beside Auckland's Northwestern Motorway.
Mr Seve, 45, picked up daughter Storm Apera-Seve from his estranged wife's Grey Lynn home on Friday and was supposed to take her back on Sunday night.
Storm was due at pre-school on Monday morning and her mother desperately tried to contact Mr Seve.
She went several times to his home and left notes for him.
The little girl was found dead in the back seat of her father's car on Wednesday afternoon.
Mr Seve abandoned the car and died when he stepped in front of a truck in heavy rush-hour traffic on the Northwestern.
Police are treating Storm's death as a homicide, but are not looking for anyone else in connection with the killing.
It emerged yesterday that Mr Seve had not returned Storm after weekend visits on other occasions.
Mr Seve had weekend custody of his daughter, but is believed to have wanted full custody.
"He's been quite wrapped up in his daughter, quite obsessed with his daughter ... wanting her with him all the time," said Detective Sergeant Megan Goldie.
Storm's mother did not contact police when he failed to return the preschooler.
"She did not have concerns for the child's welfare, as such," said Ms Goldie, "more that she wanted her back. She was supposed to be at pre-school on Monday."
John McKeown, a friend of Mr Seve for 15 years, said Storm's parents split about a year ago and a problem had developed over custody.
"I gather he wanted to look after her and his parents were talking about helping him look after her," he said.
Police have examined an area of the Avondale Racecourse where Mr Seve and Storm are thought to have slept rough in his car.
Ms Goldie said Mr Seve was seen there on Wednesday and in the days before his death on the motorway.
Storm was seen with him earlier in the week, but was not seen on Wednesday, said Ms Goldie.
Tests are being carried out on patches in the parking area which may be blood stains.
Police cannot yet say when Storm died and have not revealed the cause of death, although it is understood she had stab wounds.
A forensic examination of Mr Seve's vehicle has been completed.
Ms Goldie said police were not looking for a weapon. "We think we have what we need in the car."
Members of the Richmond Rovers Rugby League Club last night gathered in Grey Lynn to remember Mr Seve, a coach, referee and player they knew by the nickname "Squash".
Friends said Mr Seve was devastated by the death of his close friend Afi Ah Kuoi from cancer last May.
Mr Ah Kuoi died two years after losing his wife, and Mr Seve was close to the couple.
"He was very close with the family, then when this custody thing came up, maybe it was the final straw for him and he just cracked," Mr McKeown said.
George Apelu-Tumaseve, who had known Mr Seve for 30 years, told 3News last night that any custody battle "would have tipped him over the edge, if it happened that he'd lost custody of Storm, knowing how close he was to Storm ... She was the apple of his eye".
Fathers must ask for help
A plea for fathers to ask for help.
The call comes as police investigate an apparent murder-suicide in Auckland.
Forty-five-year-old Lapana Seve died after being hit by a truck on the northwestern motorway on Wednesday afternoon.
His four-year-old daughter Storm Apera-Seve was found dead in his car.
Union of Fathers national president Jim Bagnall says fathers need to know there is help out there.
He says they should not vent their frustrations with the system by taking drastic action.
Jim Bagnall believes the system is skewed towards mothers, but says the Union of Fathers can offer support and advice.
The call comes as police investigate an apparent murder-suicide in Auckland.
Forty-five-year-old Lapana Seve died after being hit by a truck on the northwestern motorway on Wednesday afternoon.
His four-year-old daughter Storm Apera-Seve was found dead in his car.
Union of Fathers national president Jim Bagnall says fathers need to know there is help out there.
He says they should not vent their frustrations with the system by taking drastic action.
Jim Bagnall believes the system is skewed towards mothers, but says the Union of Fathers can offer support and advice.
Govt slammed for refusing DNA paternity tests
Friday, 5 November 2004, 5:10 pmPress Release:
United Future NZ Party
5 November 2004
United Future MP Gordon Copeland today expressed his frustration and disappointment at the government’s steadfast refusal to use DNA-testing to prove paternity.
During debate in Parliament on the Care of Children Bill, Mr Copeland outlined a real-life case to the House.
“A young couple became the proud parents of a beautiful baby girl. Not only the mother and the father but also the maternal and paternal grandparents bonded with the child. She became the apple of their eye.
“However the story did not have a happy ending. A couple of years later, for whatever reason, the mother showed the father the door and wanted nothing more to do with him.
“The distraught father, wanting to maintain long-term contact with his daughter, sought access rights. The mother blocked this by suddenly, for the first time, claiming that he was not the little girl’s dad .
“This came as a huge shock, both to the father himself and to the paternal grandparents. They were grief-stricken at being cut off from all further contact with the child.
“More than three years later and in spite of a string of lawyers, the paternity or otherwise of the young man concerned has not been established because a DNA test involving the little girl can only be done with the consent of her mother.
- 1 -“This is an unmitigated tragedy for the grieving father and the grandparents and even more so, in time, for the child who may never get to find out who her real father actually is.
“Yet none of this need happen. A simple Family Court-ordered DNA test would establish paternity once and for all.
“We have a clear-cut means of establishing the truth in these kind of situations, but the government refuses steadfastly with incomprehensible reasons to go there. In doing so they fail the families of New Zealand.
“We have more than 19,000 birth certificates involving more than 30,000 children where the father’s name is not recorded and yet we have a scientific means at hand to clearly establish paternity.
“The particular instance I am describing represents the tip of an enormous iceberg, a systemic problem which becomes bigger by the day.
“Since I entered Parliament in 2002, together with my colleagues in United Future, we have consistently urged the government to follow the science so that truth replaces confusion, suspicion, dishonesty and the financial impropriety which flows from the current system, but the government continues to stonewall.
“It’s just not good enough,” said Mr Copeland.
United Future NZ Party
5 November 2004
United Future MP Gordon Copeland today expressed his frustration and disappointment at the government’s steadfast refusal to use DNA-testing to prove paternity.
During debate in Parliament on the Care of Children Bill, Mr Copeland outlined a real-life case to the House.
“A young couple became the proud parents of a beautiful baby girl. Not only the mother and the father but also the maternal and paternal grandparents bonded with the child. She became the apple of their eye.
“However the story did not have a happy ending. A couple of years later, for whatever reason, the mother showed the father the door and wanted nothing more to do with him.
“The distraught father, wanting to maintain long-term contact with his daughter, sought access rights. The mother blocked this by suddenly, for the first time, claiming that he was not the little girl’s dad .
“This came as a huge shock, both to the father himself and to the paternal grandparents. They were grief-stricken at being cut off from all further contact with the child.
“More than three years later and in spite of a string of lawyers, the paternity or otherwise of the young man concerned has not been established because a DNA test involving the little girl can only be done with the consent of her mother.
- 1 -“This is an unmitigated tragedy for the grieving father and the grandparents and even more so, in time, for the child who may never get to find out who her real father actually is.
“Yet none of this need happen. A simple Family Court-ordered DNA test would establish paternity once and for all.
“We have a clear-cut means of establishing the truth in these kind of situations, but the government refuses steadfastly with incomprehensible reasons to go there. In doing so they fail the families of New Zealand.
“We have more than 19,000 birth certificates involving more than 30,000 children where the father’s name is not recorded and yet we have a scientific means at hand to clearly establish paternity.
“The particular instance I am describing represents the tip of an enormous iceberg, a systemic problem which becomes bigger by the day.
“Since I entered Parliament in 2002, together with my colleagues in United Future, we have consistently urged the government to follow the science so that truth replaces confusion, suspicion, dishonesty and the financial impropriety which flows from the current system, but the government continues to stonewall.
“It’s just not good enough,” said Mr Copeland.
Govt misses chance to help children of divorce
Press Release: United Future NZ Party
Friday, 5 November, 2004
Turner: Govt misses chance to help children of divorce
The Government has missed a huge opportunity to help children whose parents are divorcing by failing to take note of innovative mediation approaches overseas, most notably recent Australian reforms, United Future's Judy Turner said today.
"They have also failed to consider Law Society recommendations on mediation and the startling results of a North Shore Family Court pilot scheme, where parents in custody disputes have to attend two parent education sessions before getting to court.
Mrs Turner, who has sponsored a Member's Bill backing just such a scheme, was critical of the Government's failure in debate on the Care of Children Bill in Parliament this morning.
"Four hours is not a lot for parents to give to focus on the impact on their children at a time when they often get so wrapped up in what is happening to themselves.
"It is about letting them know what their children face in the middle of a family storm. Sometimes that gets lost, even for otherwise good and well-meaning parents."
Mrs Turner, United Future's family affairs spokeswoman, said she believed that most parents would see this move as positive. Some 97 percent of those who have been through the North Shore Children in the Middle pilot scheme have since stated that it should be mandatory.
"In the end, parents love their kids and a few hours of mediation and education can make a huge difference," she said.
"The fact is that by the time a couple are standing before a Family Court judge, their children have already been damaged and they have proved that can't negotiate a healthy resolution.
"Anything that helps short-circuit this by encouraging sensible, non-legal alternatives can only benefit both parents and children," she said.
Friday, 5 November, 2004
Turner: Govt misses chance to help children of divorce
The Government has missed a huge opportunity to help children whose parents are divorcing by failing to take note of innovative mediation approaches overseas, most notably recent Australian reforms, United Future's Judy Turner said today.
"They have also failed to consider Law Society recommendations on mediation and the startling results of a North Shore Family Court pilot scheme, where parents in custody disputes have to attend two parent education sessions before getting to court.
Mrs Turner, who has sponsored a Member's Bill backing just such a scheme, was critical of the Government's failure in debate on the Care of Children Bill in Parliament this morning.
"Four hours is not a lot for parents to give to focus on the impact on their children at a time when they often get so wrapped up in what is happening to themselves.
"It is about letting them know what their children face in the middle of a family storm. Sometimes that gets lost, even for otherwise good and well-meaning parents."
Mrs Turner, United Future's family affairs spokeswoman, said she believed that most parents would see this move as positive. Some 97 percent of those who have been through the North Shore Children in the Middle pilot scheme have since stated that it should be mandatory.
"In the end, parents love their kids and a few hours of mediation and education can make a huge difference," she said.
"The fact is that by the time a couple are standing before a Family Court judge, their children have already been damaged and they have proved that can't negotiate a healthy resolution.
"Anything that helps short-circuit this by encouraging sensible, non-legal alternatives can only benefit both parents and children," she said.
Moment Of Truth For Shared-Parenting
Press Release: ACT New Zealand
Moment Of Truth For Shared-Parenting
Friday 5 Nov 2004
Dr Muriel Newman - Press Releases - Social Welfare
ACT New Zealand Deputy Leader and Social Welfare Spokesman Dr Muriel Newman today accused Labour, United Future, New Zealand First and the Greens of giving Kiwi fathers false hope about their support for Shared-Parenting.
"Last night, Parliament had an opportunity to change the law, to help fathers, grandparents and children throughout New Zealand who have disadvantaged by our Family Law system - but these Parties threw it away," Dr Newman said.
"I urged the House to support my amendments to introduce Shared-Parenting as a rebuttable presumption into the Care of Children Bill. My amendment introduced two shared parenting concepts:
· `shared parenting means joint day-to-day care of a child, arranged in such a way that the best interests of the child is paramount, but that the starting point is the equality of parental responsibility and rights'
· `rebuttable shared parenting as a default position for the starting point of day-to-day care determinations is based on the principle that just as two parents are equal in their parenting responsibilities and rights before a relationship breakdown, so too they should be regarded as equal afterwards, unless it can be proved that one of the parents in unfit'.
"Sadly, New Zealand First, the Greens, United Future and Labour voted the amendments down. In fact, the only other Party to support Shared-Parenting was National.
"New Zealanders who believe that Shared-Parenting should be introduced as a core principle of Family Law should realise that Shared-Parenting will only become a reality when ACT and National are in Government.
"All hope of persuading other Parties to stand up for the rights of fathers and children, by supporting Shared-Parenting, has been shown to be false," Dr Newman said.
Moment Of Truth For Shared-Parenting
Friday 5 Nov 2004
Dr Muriel Newman - Press Releases - Social Welfare
ACT New Zealand Deputy Leader and Social Welfare Spokesman Dr Muriel Newman today accused Labour, United Future, New Zealand First and the Greens of giving Kiwi fathers false hope about their support for Shared-Parenting.
"Last night, Parliament had an opportunity to change the law, to help fathers, grandparents and children throughout New Zealand who have disadvantaged by our Family Law system - but these Parties threw it away," Dr Newman said.
"I urged the House to support my amendments to introduce Shared-Parenting as a rebuttable presumption into the Care of Children Bill. My amendment introduced two shared parenting concepts:
· `shared parenting means joint day-to-day care of a child, arranged in such a way that the best interests of the child is paramount, but that the starting point is the equality of parental responsibility and rights'
· `rebuttable shared parenting as a default position for the starting point of day-to-day care determinations is based on the principle that just as two parents are equal in their parenting responsibilities and rights before a relationship breakdown, so too they should be regarded as equal afterwards, unless it can be proved that one of the parents in unfit'.
"Sadly, New Zealand First, the Greens, United Future and Labour voted the amendments down. In fact, the only other Party to support Shared-Parenting was National.
"New Zealanders who believe that Shared-Parenting should be introduced as a core principle of Family Law should realise that Shared-Parenting will only become a reality when ACT and National are in Government.
"All hope of persuading other Parties to stand up for the rights of fathers and children, by supporting Shared-Parenting, has been shown to be false," Dr Newman said.
Friday, November 05, 2004
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)