Editorial: Ugly truth behind Garrett's words

Last updated 05:00 10/03/2010

Relevant offers

Editorials

Editorial: Half-baked ideas not what public needs NZ, mate, you might have a drinking problem Editorial: Adding value to our national days Editorial: Wellington's waterfront is a gem Editorial: Family reunions - who should pay? Editorial: Veto protects Syria's blood-stained leader Editorial: Section 9 row adds to asset sale unease Editorial: A lesson primary teachers could learn Editorial: Some advice really is worth following Editorial: Clock ticking on Christchurch mayor

OPINION: ACT list MP David Garrett should know by now that, when he thinks aloud, he will almost certainly find himself in trouble.

Like Maori Party bad boy Hone Harawira, he shoots from the lip, and his homespun philosophy is rarely politically correct.

But despite both MPs' comments ritually provoking outrage, a kernel of truth is often found therein.

Last week, Mr Garrett was in hot water again, this time for daring to suggest that parents who have abused their children be offered $5000 to get themselves sterilised.

"Nothing compulsory, just an option," he said during an online conversation, citing Chris Kahui and Macsyna King as examples of those who might benefit from his proposal.

Mr Kahui and Ms King were the parents of three-month-old twin boys, killed nearly four years ago. He was acquitted of murder, no one has yet been held responsible for their deaths, and Mr Kahui has gone on to father another child.

Predictably, Mr Garrett's comments were compared with the excesses of Nazi Germany. Mr Kahui's lawyer, Lorraine Smith, called them "outrageous and a disgrace".

Perhaps. But those who lambast Mr Garrett for initiating an idea that at least attempts to confront the issue need to face an unpalatable fact: programmes in place now to protect vulnerable children are failing. Sixteen children died last year as a result of family violence.

Delcelia Witika, Lillybing, James Whakaruru, Nia Glassie, Chris and Cru Kahui comprise just a handful of the names on New Zealand's roll of shame, each one killed by people whose responsibility it was to care for them.

And people who knew these little ones were being abused did not intervene. It is not good enough.

There is no doubt that the Garrett proposal is a step too far. However, even his most vehement critics should find an initiative instigated by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett more acceptable.

Last week, an Experts Forum on Child Abuse recommended that state agencies be able to keep track of parents whose children had died, or been taken off them.

The problem is that, at present, files are closed when a child dies, and social workers don't know another child has been born to the same mother until that child, too, comes to their notice through abuse or, worse, because he or she has died.

These experts, who include those on the abuse frontline at Starship children's hospital, say that information-sharing among agencies is still inadequate, and that healthcare professionals are still routinely not told by other agencies when the children they are treating are at risk.

Ad Feedback

The most dispiriting aspect of these recommendations is that they are not already in place.

Children keep dying because their parents don't care, because their mothers keep boyfriends not worthy of being called men, because neighbours and family ignore the telltale signs, and because timid bureaucrats fear overstepping the mark.

It is no wonder Mr Garrett is casting around for new ideas. The old ones aren't working.

- © Fairfax NZ News

3 comments
Post a comment
tony   #3   03:12 pm Mar 10 2010

this 'opinion' is so one sided (as I guess opinions are), that it is almostthe same as Mr Garrets shoot-from-the-hip mentality. This opinion states that child abuse is because of "mothers keep boyfriends not worthy of being called men" and 3 other extreme reasons like this, that probably account for less than 20% of child abuse cases. Its easy to find a 'reason' and then a shoot-from-the-hip solution. How about some opinion thats based on something more informative !

Miles Lacey   #2   01:57 pm Mar 10 2010

Sterilising child abusers is a waste of time because it is merely reacting after the fact. Wouldn't it be better to offer free sterilization to those who want it and pay us the equivilant of all the handouts that we would've got if we had reproduced based on our backgrounds? Now that would be an incentive!

zocor   #1   09:32 am Mar 10 2010

I am constantly hearing the complaint that our elected representitives are out of touch in their cloistered environments. However, when they do speak their mind, and call a spade a spade, they are immediately attacted and smeared by a media that have PCness as their guide, which is why no remedies are ever found. The tack taken by the liberal media is typical of their ilk, attack the man with the idea, rather than the idea itself. I find it increadulous such venom was directed at Mr.Garrett, when his suggestion was "Voluntary" sterilisation. Particularly when the Communist Left or the Facist Rights view of people surplus to requirement such as these, has traditionaly been "Compulsory" sterilisation or Summary Execution.

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you , you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.


Maximum of 1750 characters (about 300 words)

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content