Fenton Darien: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Fenton Darien: Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:638;Page:8444] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I am grateful for the opportunity to take a call in this debate on clause 3 of the Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Bill. It is the first time I have spoken on this issue and I appreciate the chance to put my point of view on record. Clause 3 the purpose clause is pretty clear but I have been pretty astounded by the suggested amendments the debate and the hysteria that this bill has engendered. It is natural for people to have strong views when it comes to our children. I understand that. New Zealanders do tend to be fiercely protective of their families. But for me it is a simple question of protecting small people and babies. Is it right for adults who have a lot of power compared with small people and babies to exercise that power in physical force and for that physical force to continue to be a defence? I say it is not. I say it is time that we all accept that there are better ways to raise children than to exercise violence upon them. We are talking about violence here. We are talking about physical force and whether it is trivial or transitory or whether it is a light spank or a big wallop it is still physical force that is being used on human beings who are vulnerable. 
One of the good things about Sue Bradford’s bill—and I thank the member for it—is that it has created debate in this country about how we raise our children. As in many families I imagine there have been lots of conversations in my family about our experiences both as children and in raising our own children—and of course lots of debate as well. I realised when I was talking with my siblings that we could never remember being smacked or hit in any way. The reason is that we were raised when Dr Spock was advising our parents that hitting children was not an effective way of teaching a child boundaries. Of course when Dr Spock was an old man he resiled from that advice saying he had encouraged a generation of spoilt brats. I disagree; I think that is pretty harsh. Those I know who were raised under Dr Spock’s advice are good law-abiding citizens. I am one of them. 
I recall being whacked at school. I know that this is not to do with the purpose of this bill but I think it is important to remember that in the past this House has debated issues about violence towards children. It eventually saw sense and outlawed corporal punishment. I remember when I was in standard 4 a teacher galloping down the corridor towards me to deliver the strap with maximum force. I remember how shocked I was. It did not change my behaviour; in fact it might have contributed to it in the future because I did not think I had done anything wrong. It made me more defiant and determined to buck the system. I became a hero in standard 4 because I was the one who stood up to the teachers. The sense of injustice I felt at that time was so strong that it influenced my lifelong pursuit of social justice. 
When my siblings and I raised our children we set out not to discipline them with force emulating the example that had been set by our parents. Unfortunately I recall losing my temper once with my little son and whacking him. To this day I regret it. Anyone who has parented a child can understand the level of frustration that leads parents to do things like that but it could so easily have escalated into punishment that went wrong. 
Like many mums I worked as a supervisor in the local playcentre as mums often do when their kids are small. I often ended up dealing with other people’s children who were hitting each other. When I said that that was not OK they could not understand it because they had been taught by their parents that hitting was OK. The fact is that children learn by observing their parents and there is no doubt that violence begets violence. It is well established that children who have grown up with violence are more likely to perpetuate violence on their own families. Positive parenting has been found to be much more effective in teaching children to behave well. 
Parents can make different choices about setting boundaries for children. I had an interesting conversation with a taxi driver on my way into Parliament at the beginning of the week. He told me that he has never hit his kids and that he did not support hitting kids. But when he took his daughter’s cellphone off her for a week she begged him to curtail her allowance for a month instead because taking that cellphone had a real impact on her. We can parent without violence and the Government’s SKIP programme teaches parents how to do that. I just wish that I had had that programme when I was the parent of a young child.