Hard News: The son that got away
144 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
Someone upthread said the motivation was about not wanting to be a law-breaker, which made sense.
RNZ report Baldock saying that Latta won't make any difference to the review because the terms of reference prevent him from doing what Baldock demands - and which the confusingly worded referendum obviously meant if only God were guiding one's reading - change the law to reflect the imperatives of US-influenced church folk like himself.
-
My language could have been more temperate in initially commenting on the announcement, but I did see some of Latta's Politically Incorrect Guide to Parenting and it did not impress me. I thought it was sometimes banal; more a branded comedy roadshow than anything else. Example: approaching breast-feeding via the strawman of "breast Nazis".
And the Sensing Murder thing was an enduring embarrassment.
Maybe I'm wrong and he'll do a good job -- there's clearly something I'm not hearing that other people like -- but I did feel that Key just picked the funny bloke from the telly.
Because this issue has been dealt with to date in largely emotive and ideological rhetoric, I am interested solely in looking at the data, and in forming an opinion on the actual impact of the law change on that basis. For that reason I will not be meeting with, corresponding with, or entering into discussions with, any lobby groups from either end of the debate.
Which I guess is good: it's not like they're going to make any new arguments. Odds-on he'll roll out the Dunedin longitudinal study.
-
Good to see you bring this debate out on Media 7 russell. I greatly admired your restraint with Larry Baldock - I could see you were tempted to apply some good parental correction to the man who of course did not make any sense.
If you regularly dump on people, they won't come on your show. If you're polite but try not to let them get away with their usual lines, it'll work. Baldock actually emailed later to thank us for the opportunity, which I thought was good form.
-
RNZ report Baldock saying that Latta won't make any difference to the review because the terms of reference prevent him from doing what Baldock demands
Once more: What worse than a sore loser? A bad and graceless winner!
So, let us see if I've got this right: Baldock is all pissy because it seems the review hasn't had the ToR rigged to come up with a pre-determined outcome? That's a bad thing because...
-
Slightly off topic but fascinating to learn about the role of the infamous right wing blog commentator Dad4Justice in the current Christchurch murder case. Mr Burns was their praying family counsellor.
-
The Dunedin longitudinal study is quite hard to interpret on the effects of 'smacking' as tidy questions were not asked.
-
The Dunedin longitudinal study is quite hard to interpret on the effects of 'smacking' as tidy questions were not asked.
Which, as you'll know, doesn't stop world + dog from quoting it in pursuit of smacking arguments.
Mind you, the people who run that study don't seem averse themselves to hauling the odd headline-grabbing zinger out of their data.
-
Oh for FUCK'S SAKE. Key has just appointed Nigel Latta to the group reviewing the child discipline law.
Awesome! I hope that Latta can widen the group's terms of reference to include ESP, clairvoyance, and the survival of consciousness after death! Perhaps his findings will help police "sense" when an act of parental correction is neither "transitory" nor "trifling".
-
There are better studies than the Dunedin longitudinal one that clearly show that where children are hit there is more fear and less trust than in families where children are not hit. Don't ask me to find them now but Prof Anne Smith retired from the Children's Issues Centre Otago Uni and Dr Gabrielle Maxwell from VUW have written on such studies over the years.
-
Latta:
Having got to reading the PM's press release, my actual reaction was to wonder what expertise a psychologist would have under the terms of reference - which seems to be about police/cypfs processes. Perhaps he's the one who gets to decide what level of physical physical correction should have consequences.
I also though Baldock might actually be correct about the whitewashey thing. Not that I mind.
Here's Latta's PR too. Yeah, plenty of self-assurance there.
It's clear from the PM's presser he was apppointed because he's a 'No' chap. My impression is if you chose a Clinical Psychologist at random you'd be unlikely to get on of those.
-
Have just watched smacking discussion on last week's Media 7. Great television, Russell.
And a very interesting link to the awards, Lyndon.
I just wonder why NZ is having this debate in a sort of national vacuum when a lot of other countries have been there already.
-
3410,
Oh for FUCK'S SAKE. Key has just appointed Nigel Latta to the group reviewing the child discipline law.
If you think that's bad, apparently he's now put TV builder/goofball "Cocksy" in charge of the $11b leaky homes debacle (no online source yet, it seems.)
This can't be true... can it? What next? Jude Dobson in charge of Health restructuring?
-
What next? Jude Dobson in charge of Health restructuring?
um... John Banks in charge of Super Auckland
-
My impression is if you chose a Clinical Psychologist at random you'd be unlikely to get on of those.
This kind of thinking seems to be quite prevalent - that a professional society of some kind makes a public announcement of a position means that the majority of people within that society agree with it.
Hence the strange disconnect a lot of people feel when they try to reconcile the position of just about every child welfare body on s59 with their own private experiences of those professionals.
As a simple example of this, is it likely that a large bunch of primary school teachers are going to stand up publicly and say that they want to be able to smack children? Given that it hasn't been allowed for the longest time for teachers, and has recently been made illegal even for parents, such a stance would amount to employment suicide. But nothing about that say that those teachers actually agree with s59. They might just feel unable due to their very employment to say so.
It is quite possible that groupthink on a grand scale went on wrt to s59. No one felt able to publicly say they disagreed with it, but most people actually did in fact disagree with it. The higher the office, the more unable they were to say what they really thought.
Please note I'm only saying this is possible.
I thought the Larry Baldock interview was excellent, btw. It could have gone horribly pear shaped.
-
Slightly off topic but fascinating to learn about the role of the infamous right wing blog commentator Dad4Justice in the current Christchurch murder case. Mr Burns was their praying family counsellor.
Yes, and I wonder if he might have learned something. Perhaps along the lines of, "just because CYF does it, it doesn't mean it's necessarily wrong":
Burns last saw the couple a month ago and was devastated when the bodies of Chamberlain and Tisha Lowry were found. "I'm just thankful now, in retrospect, that I wasn't successful in getting their two daughters and son back."
-
that a professional society of some kind makes a public announcement of a position means that the majority of people within that society agree with it.
In this case the thought was originally based on 'clin psychs I know', who are not many in number and work with violent criminals, so that's not what you'd call statistical either.
-
-
Larry went and lodged his referendum petition proposal.
A non-binding referendum asking the question whether referenda should be binding. Larry obviously has a sense of humour that we've missed seeing.
-
He's an existential genius.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.