Family First is stunned by comments made by Sue Bradford in a recent speech regarding her Private Members’ Bill to ban smacking.
In a speech last week (posted on the Green’s website), she stated that many parents who choose to use a smack as a form of discipline oppose the change of law because they feel guilty or are afraid of being made to feel guilty.
“This is insulting to the many parents who discipline their children in an appropriate way because they know what is best for their children, yet are accused of acting against their conscience, and supposedly hiding their guilt,” says Bob McCoskrie, National Director of Family First.
But the most objectionable comment in the speech was the connection between smacking and sexual perversion.
“Sue Bradford said ‘Personally, I have no problem with sadomasochism carried out between consenting adults using safe sex practices – what I do have a problem with is a legacy of hidden sexual violence practised on children and young people under a mantle of so-called discipline…. Section 59 of the Crimes Act, has been protecting the perpetrators of a vicious mix of sexual and physical abuse for generations.’ “
“These are stunning and insulting comments implied against the many good parents who do a great job of raising their children in an appropriate manner,” says Mr McCoskrie.
“Section 59 of the Crimes Act never has and never will protect child abusers and sex abusers, and Sue Bradford’s suggestion that parents who use a smack for discipline may be sexually perverted is beyond belief. The recent NZ research showing the benefits of reasonable discipline undermines her whole argument.”
“To link smacking with sexual abuse shows just how dangerous this Bill will be to parents, if passed.”