i'm not exactly sure what we've done to deserve this:
Press Release: Nigel Latta
I have been approached by the Prime Minister and asked if I would consider participating in a review of the Police and CYF processes around S 59 to see if the law is working as intended....
I see my role as first and foremost to look at the evidence and to ensure that the law does not result in good parents either being criminalised, or being needlessly subjected to investigations that are intrusive and/or traumatic. This is a responsibility I hold directly to the everyday mums and dads of New Zealand, and one that I take very seriously.
why couldn't we have that nice lady from that nanny programme on tv - no, i don't mean fran drescher, i mean the other one who comes into your house, gives you a few techniques on child discipline (none of which involve violence, incidentally), and within weeks, your little ones become very well-behaved. i reckon she could tell us if good parents were being needlessly victimised!
or if we couldn't get her, what about fran drescher? i'm sure she could do the job just as well.
7 comments:
While Latta is a celebrity, he is also a qualified child pyschologist with a lot of practical experience.
Isn't it at least vaguely possible that he's being appointed at least as much for this reason as for his celebrity status?
I find it a bit odd that it warrants a press release though. Or is it just me?
No, it isn't just you, KimV.
Classic NACT. For them it's all about perception rather thn reality and they know a good portion of the populace will soak up Higel vlbrety status as evidence the guvmint is doing something positive.
Hugh, on National Radio this morning the PM said something along the lines of that having Nige, who obviously voted No, meant that people couldn't accuse the panel of bias.
If you want an expert why not someone like Professor Gordon Harold or Professor Anne Smith? http://www.otago.ac.nz/crcf/staff/index.html#harold
http://www.otago.ac.nz/humanities/research/clusters/children/anne_profile.html
They should appoint Paul Henry and Michael Laws so they can have a trifecta of "politically incorrect" wankers.
Inspired use of 'trifecta', Boganette.
I'm a bit confused about what it is the panel's doing. If it's looking at how CYFS and/or the Police deal with allegations, the focus would presumably be procedural? In that case, a person's view on smacking or expertise on child welfare issues may not be too relevant.
Without dissing Nigel Latta's qualifications (I've actually got no idea what they are), I'd be concerned if he advocates stuff which is contrary to the research around smacking. If his professional opinion is that smacking is OK, that opinion should be based on something - that's what we expect from professionals. If it's just his personal opinion, then it's worth the same as anyone else's.
Post a Comment