The interesting debate about the Kahui twins provides once again the opportunity for New Zealanders to examine closely the sort of society we are all part of but do not want to accept as reality. I listened to the Children's Commissioner ,Rankin's comments on TV1 on Thursday night, 30 June, and although I wouldn't have expressed the view in the same way, what she said is true.
Middle class New Zealanders are very uncomfortable speaking about this subject and from my observations, men in particular. One gets onto the subject of domestic violence and child abuse and it interesting to watch the body language. With figures such as officially 120,000 interventions per year in the area of child abuse and domestic violence and estimates that this only represents 15% of what is actually going on, the size of the problem in New Zealand is a disgace. It could involve in excess of 800,000 interventions per year if full reporting occurred in a population of 4.4 million people. With this level of offending it is difficult to see how anyone would not be aware of possible instances of domestic violence and child abuse.
Hence I believe the discomfort people have in discussing the subject. By not discussing and dealing with this subject in a full and open manner it will never be addressed and another generation of domestic violence perpetrators and child abusers will emerge.
I will never forget the Maori co-leader, Peter Sharples, very early on attempting to get involved with the Kahui twin situation in an effort to get the family to open up and his frustration at trying to deal with what he discribed as a disfunctional family. This situation is not as uncommon as people would like to believe. Kids coming home from school not knowing which boyfriend/girlfriend will be there, whether there is food in the cupboard, no nurturing and love, no help with homework etc etc is not uncommon. Teachers deal with the disfunctional behaviour of kids from these environments every day. Some of these kids emerging from these environments are badly damaged. They feel totally unloved because no one has ever said to them that they were loved. They have no one to turn to except other kids in the same predictament.
The Police, Salvation Army and other agencies have to negotiate their way through these social disaster areas. They can't put their head in the sand like so many people do. They deal in the real world.
The first thing that can be done is bring this behaviour out into the open. It is not just a "brown problem" as some middle class folk think. The issue of domestic violence and child abuse knows no socio economic, racial or ethnic barriers. Crimestoppers can assist in bringing these behaviours to the surface, assisting the Police and other agencies. It just can't be left to the Police and other Agencies. We are all part of the community. New Zealand can deal with this challenge together.
This is a New Zealand Community problem which the whole community needs to be involved in to successully solve it.
Friday, July 1, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
ALCOHOL AND DRUGS
Whether we like it or not alcohol and drugs are behind most of the crime in NZ today. Some estimates are that 80% of crime can be put down to alcohol and other drugs. When I recently had a conversation with a Police community constable he stated that if alcohol was taken out of society much of the crime he deals with would disappear - domestic violence, violence in general, traffic accidents, stupid acts and so on. Today I listened to a lecture given to a bunch of young people on a Limited Volunteer Scheme at Trentham Camp. It was delivered by a person from Well Trust and I must say it was very informative and highlighted the destructive nature of drugs especially alcohol and cannabis. Yes, "P", heroin, cocaine, tobacco etc are bad, but the ready availability of alcohol and the supposed harmlessness of cannabis makes them more dangerous and destructive.
The presenter introduced these young people to how alcohol affects the brain and alters the behaviour in people. He emphasised the incredible danger that alcohol has on the unborn child as a woman goes through her pregancy. His cost estimates on the damage that alcohol causes was $6 billion dollars per year. I know that from my time in the Army, 37 years, many in command appointments, alcohol was the cause of 90% of the incidents that threatened the Army's reputation. When the operation area was "dry" very few disciplinary incidents occurred. So from a health, economic and management perspective perhaps those, who are advocating for an increase in the age that alcohol can be accessed, should be listened to more closely. I supported the lowering of the age when it occurred but now believe the information available means that this decision to lower the age should be reconsidered with the view to tightening access to alcohol. I do think we should be asking ourselves the question; Are we so inadequate as individuals and a society that we need alcohol to enjoy ourselves?
The presenter then got onto cannabis and the very destructive nature of this drug on people under 25, that is, before the brain is fully developed. Regular long term use, that is, over 5 years, means that the brain is unable to recover from the damage cannabis causes. The fact that it stays in the system for upto 5 to 6 weeks and is absorbed into fat cells in the brains, provides a greater opportunity for more damage. Nearly 90% of those in prison have a drug problem of some discription. Predominately this is cannabis, a drug that many inmates have been using for years.
The presentation was not aimed at scaring the young people but to inform them of the dangers so that they could make informed decisions about their futures. These young people, all of whom were unemployed prior to attending the course, were only in their second week of the course. I was impressed by their participation in the presentation in regards their questions and how they answered questions. I think the presentation by the Well Trust person should be absolutely compulsory in all schools. I think if young people were fully aware of the dangers of alcohol and cannabis, especially if used together, one may see some modification of behaviour. The recent, high publicity deaths of school pupils, certainly indicates this type of presentation is important.
Teachers and parents are not the best people to provide the message - an independent person will invariably be able to get the message across better because they are not the regular person warning them of dangers etc.
The presenter introduced these young people to how alcohol affects the brain and alters the behaviour in people. He emphasised the incredible danger that alcohol has on the unborn child as a woman goes through her pregancy. His cost estimates on the damage that alcohol causes was $6 billion dollars per year. I know that from my time in the Army, 37 years, many in command appointments, alcohol was the cause of 90% of the incidents that threatened the Army's reputation. When the operation area was "dry" very few disciplinary incidents occurred. So from a health, economic and management perspective perhaps those, who are advocating for an increase in the age that alcohol can be accessed, should be listened to more closely. I supported the lowering of the age when it occurred but now believe the information available means that this decision to lower the age should be reconsidered with the view to tightening access to alcohol. I do think we should be asking ourselves the question; Are we so inadequate as individuals and a society that we need alcohol to enjoy ourselves?
The presenter then got onto cannabis and the very destructive nature of this drug on people under 25, that is, before the brain is fully developed. Regular long term use, that is, over 5 years, means that the brain is unable to recover from the damage cannabis causes. The fact that it stays in the system for upto 5 to 6 weeks and is absorbed into fat cells in the brains, provides a greater opportunity for more damage. Nearly 90% of those in prison have a drug problem of some discription. Predominately this is cannabis, a drug that many inmates have been using for years.
The presentation was not aimed at scaring the young people but to inform them of the dangers so that they could make informed decisions about their futures. These young people, all of whom were unemployed prior to attending the course, were only in their second week of the course. I was impressed by their participation in the presentation in regards their questions and how they answered questions. I think the presentation by the Well Trust person should be absolutely compulsory in all schools. I think if young people were fully aware of the dangers of alcohol and cannabis, especially if used together, one may see some modification of behaviour. The recent, high publicity deaths of school pupils, certainly indicates this type of presentation is important.
Teachers and parents are not the best people to provide the message - an independent person will invariably be able to get the message across better because they are not the regular person warning them of dangers etc.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Today it was reported that Larissa Brown who had complained about domestic violence that she had experienced by her ex partner, J williams, was being bullied on the social networking site "Facebook". When will people get it - there is no excuse for any kind of domestic abuse and being a so called celebrity does not give you any licence to indulge in this behaviour. It is accepted the person in this case, J Williams, has acknowledged his behaviour and how wrong it is and this is a big step in overcoming a problem. I admire him for having the guts to do this. Now of course he has to overcome the problem - clearly he appears to be someone who will and that is encouraging and an example to others.
It has been interesting to see some people have left the Crimestoppers Facebook site when I have raised this issue. Clearly it supports my view that many in society don't want to comfront an issue that is limiting the lives of many individuals - partners and children. What right does anyone have to have this impact on others. They have none. If nothing is done to combat the problem a new generation of abusers will be produced. Sticking one's head in the sand will not make the behaviour go away. Education, tolerance, less alcohol and eliminating illegal drug use, and being held accountable for your actions will eventuately reduce and eliminate the problem.
It has been interesting to see some people have left the Crimestoppers Facebook site when I have raised this issue. Clearly it supports my view that many in society don't want to comfront an issue that is limiting the lives of many individuals - partners and children. What right does anyone have to have this impact on others. They have none. If nothing is done to combat the problem a new generation of abusers will be produced. Sticking one's head in the sand will not make the behaviour go away. Education, tolerance, less alcohol and eliminating illegal drug use, and being held accountable for your actions will eventuately reduce and eliminate the problem.
Wednesday, May 11, 2011
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND CHILD ABUSE
The article below is one that I have written for a newspaper column and one that I think I need to put on my blog as the column is in a small local newspaper.
A week ago I would have written about scamming and New Zealanders failure and/or resistance to listening to advice on scamming. $448 million scammed per year. It’s hard to believe.
However, the non-accidental death of the six month old Serenity in Ngaruawahia, a small township just north of Hamilton, changed all that.
This article is aimed at highlighting the appalling statistics of domestic violence and child abuse in NZ. On a per capita basis we are at the worst end of the scale. Today I have read that there are 120,000 plus reports of domestic violence situations each year. This is up from 50,000 plus in 2005. Clearly some of this increase is from better reporting of domestic violence each year, which is great, but some is from increased violence in our communities.
There are also over 100,000 interventions by Government agencies in domestic violent situations each year. This is 300 per day. Even though many of these interventions concern the same family groupings it is still a disgraceful statistic in a civilised society. The Police deal with 5,000 to 6,000 child abuse situations each year, ranging from very young children like little Serenity, to teenage children. Recently I heard about a 15 year old belted by his father. The young lad thought he had deserved it because he had “pissed off” his father. He was assured by school staff that no parent had this right. The young lad’s reaction shows how this behaviour becomes inter-generational.
Crimestoppers provides a great vehicle to bring this domestic violence and child abuse to the surface. Family and neighbours know what is going on and need to take effective action. It is about looking after another human being. We feel compelled to do it as a nation by sending the military offshore to protect the vulnerable. If you know it is going on and do nothing and someone is killed you can’t say that it wasn’t your responsibility. Children look to adults for love and guidance and they trust adults, particularly family. What we see in these situations is that the child’s trust is totally misplaced as they are injured and sometimes killed by those who are meant to love and cherish them.
My plea to the community is to have absolutely nil tolerance to this behaviour. Do something about it when you know about it. You are not a “nark”. What a stupid, immature word. A moron painted this on the fence of someone trying to do something positive about Serenity’s death. I would suggest that some young victims would be still alive if someone had spoken up.
As a community let us do something about this abuse – ring the Police or if this is too difficult for whatever reason, then provide the information to Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 and we will get the message to the Police. Don’t be intimidated by anyone. Do what is right.
A week ago I would have written about scamming and New Zealanders failure and/or resistance to listening to advice on scamming. $448 million scammed per year. It’s hard to believe.
However, the non-accidental death of the six month old Serenity in Ngaruawahia, a small township just north of Hamilton, changed all that.
This article is aimed at highlighting the appalling statistics of domestic violence and child abuse in NZ. On a per capita basis we are at the worst end of the scale. Today I have read that there are 120,000 plus reports of domestic violence situations each year. This is up from 50,000 plus in 2005. Clearly some of this increase is from better reporting of domestic violence each year, which is great, but some is from increased violence in our communities.
There are also over 100,000 interventions by Government agencies in domestic violent situations each year. This is 300 per day. Even though many of these interventions concern the same family groupings it is still a disgraceful statistic in a civilised society. The Police deal with 5,000 to 6,000 child abuse situations each year, ranging from very young children like little Serenity, to teenage children. Recently I heard about a 15 year old belted by his father. The young lad thought he had deserved it because he had “pissed off” his father. He was assured by school staff that no parent had this right. The young lad’s reaction shows how this behaviour becomes inter-generational.
Crimestoppers provides a great vehicle to bring this domestic violence and child abuse to the surface. Family and neighbours know what is going on and need to take effective action. It is about looking after another human being. We feel compelled to do it as a nation by sending the military offshore to protect the vulnerable. If you know it is going on and do nothing and someone is killed you can’t say that it wasn’t your responsibility. Children look to adults for love and guidance and they trust adults, particularly family. What we see in these situations is that the child’s trust is totally misplaced as they are injured and sometimes killed by those who are meant to love and cherish them.
My plea to the community is to have absolutely nil tolerance to this behaviour. Do something about it when you know about it. You are not a “nark”. What a stupid, immature word. A moron painted this on the fence of someone trying to do something positive about Serenity’s death. I would suggest that some young victims would be still alive if someone had spoken up.
As a community let us do something about this abuse – ring the Police or if this is too difficult for whatever reason, then provide the information to Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111 and we will get the message to the Police. Don’t be intimidated by anyone. Do what is right.
Tuesday, May 3, 2011
DRUG LAW RECOMMENDATION
Today it has been interesting to listen to and read the various commentaries about the so called "softening the approach to drugs" being recommended by the Law Commission to the Select Committee. Tonight I heard the Deputy Law Commissioner attempting to explain the recommendation to Larry Williams, the well known ZB radio host. He certainly did not manage to convince him of the new approach, nor that it was not about softening the approach to drugs. I was driving and was very tempted to phone in to provide my input. I could identify where Williams was coming from but had had the advantage of having just attended a presentation at the US Embassy. I have not read the Law Commission's report so I do not know whether it accurately reflects what I heard at the presentation.
I had attended a presentation made by Judge (Retired) Peggy Hora, who has been intimately involved with the development of drug courts in the US. I can assure you, she certainly did not come across as a "softy" or easy on crime. She came across as a pragmatic person who wanted the justice system, in regards dealing with drug crime, to be more successful than it has been. As she pointed out, sending a small time user (not dealer) of drugs to jail did not change anything. They did their time and were out reoffending almost straight away. Reason: the crude intervention taken, putting the person in jail, did not deal with the problem.
The idea of drug courts in the US and elsewhere is to remove the conflict from the court room, defence against prosecutor, and look for a solution which has a change of stopping the person reoffending. In other words an intervention that works. So all those involved in the court system, the Judge, lawyers, police, parole officer, and agencies dealing with addictions attempt to find a solution which meets that required by the Justice system and lessens the chance of reoffending. The situations that this process relates to are small time users who have an addiction problem. This makes up many of the cases that come before the courts. It does not apply to dealers who are making money out of drug crime - they get, as one would expect, the full weight of the law. Dealing in my view is any selling of drugs, no matter how big/small.
Jailing a person with an addiction problem does not appear to achieve anything in regards stopping reoffending. The addiction needs to be dealt with. In simple terms, the accused is asked whether they wish to go through this drug court process. If they elect not to, then they go through the normal criminal justice system and take their chances. Once they elect to go through the system their addiction is assessed and an appropriate program is put in place to help them overcome the addition. Their progress is monitored closely by all the court officials including the Judge. This includes regular screening for drug use. There are ten critical aspects that must occur in the process for success and no compromise can be made.
The Judge pointed out that for an addict this is a tough process. For many to be successful they have to change their whole life including, in many cases, disassociating themselves from their former friends and associates because this would put them back in the environment of drug taking.
The results achieved are very encouraging with the reoffending rate being halved as a result of this process and millions of dollars have been saved. In addition the individual is rehabilitated back into society to become a person who contributes to that society. This has to be a better solution than people going in and out of jail, with nothing being done about their addiction.
One point that the Judge made was that the majority of crime is cause by addition to both legal and illegal substances. She did not the damage that alcohol causes.
If what the Law Commission has recommended is aligned to what I understand the Judge was saying and the Police believe it is workable, afterall they have to deal with street level drug activity, then there is merit in looking at the proposal.
I had attended a presentation made by Judge (Retired) Peggy Hora, who has been intimately involved with the development of drug courts in the US. I can assure you, she certainly did not come across as a "softy" or easy on crime. She came across as a pragmatic person who wanted the justice system, in regards dealing with drug crime, to be more successful than it has been. As she pointed out, sending a small time user (not dealer) of drugs to jail did not change anything. They did their time and were out reoffending almost straight away. Reason: the crude intervention taken, putting the person in jail, did not deal with the problem.
The idea of drug courts in the US and elsewhere is to remove the conflict from the court room, defence against prosecutor, and look for a solution which has a change of stopping the person reoffending. In other words an intervention that works. So all those involved in the court system, the Judge, lawyers, police, parole officer, and agencies dealing with addictions attempt to find a solution which meets that required by the Justice system and lessens the chance of reoffending. The situations that this process relates to are small time users who have an addiction problem. This makes up many of the cases that come before the courts. It does not apply to dealers who are making money out of drug crime - they get, as one would expect, the full weight of the law. Dealing in my view is any selling of drugs, no matter how big/small.
Jailing a person with an addiction problem does not appear to achieve anything in regards stopping reoffending. The addiction needs to be dealt with. In simple terms, the accused is asked whether they wish to go through this drug court process. If they elect not to, then they go through the normal criminal justice system and take their chances. Once they elect to go through the system their addiction is assessed and an appropriate program is put in place to help them overcome the addition. Their progress is monitored closely by all the court officials including the Judge. This includes regular screening for drug use. There are ten critical aspects that must occur in the process for success and no compromise can be made.
The Judge pointed out that for an addict this is a tough process. For many to be successful they have to change their whole life including, in many cases, disassociating themselves from their former friends and associates because this would put them back in the environment of drug taking.
The results achieved are very encouraging with the reoffending rate being halved as a result of this process and millions of dollars have been saved. In addition the individual is rehabilitated back into society to become a person who contributes to that society. This has to be a better solution than people going in and out of jail, with nothing being done about their addiction.
One point that the Judge made was that the majority of crime is cause by addition to both legal and illegal substances. She did not the damage that alcohol causes.
If what the Law Commission has recommended is aligned to what I understand the Judge was saying and the Police believe it is workable, afterall they have to deal with street level drug activity, then there is merit in looking at the proposal.
Tuesday, April 26, 2011
SCAMMING - A REAL AND VERY SAD ISSUE
A few years ago most people would never of heard of scamming. However, as more and more of the population have gained access to internet, more business transactions are conducted online as greater efficency is sought. There is no doubt that this development of internet facilities to conduct business has removed barriers to simple business transactions. Even in trying to find "love" and "friendship" people have turned to the internet.
However, this growth in internet business transactions has increasingly exposed the user of the facilities to a greater threat of theft of identity, funds and goods, often described in terms of scamming. Some may think that only vulnerable or those who are not well endowed intellectually fall prey to these scammers. That is not the case, and we even saw a week ago that the much maligned Hotchin, a Director of Hanover, was successfully scammed by some locals, that is, New Zealanders. He was apparently taken in by the promise of some very high returns on his funds.
In the last 12 months, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs has estimated that over $448 million was scammed from New Zealanders in the last 12 months. When I speak with Community Groups they are incredulous of this amount being scammed from New Zealanders. They ask, "what were these people thinking about". New Zealanders are often characterised as being a trusting group who can be a "soft touch" for tragic/sad stories. These are great characteristics to have but can make New Zealanders extra vulnerable to the scammers, both external and internal.
I have been informed of people being scammed as a result of internet friendships promising love some time down the track. People looking and convinced they have found a soul mate. These have ranged to as much as $750,000 in 6 weeks - and not always to the Nigerian scammers. Some of these scammers are in well developed European countries. These scammers once they have the person on the hook know exactly what buttons to push to keep the victim in play.
So don't be under any illusion that scammers only come from places like Nigeria. I have personally dealt with a number of people who have been scammed from overseas scammers and individuals residing overseas by New Zealand scammers. Only last weekend, I had someone get in touch about an apartment they thought they had rented in the UK. Once they had sent the money they knew that they had been scammed and were asking me how they could stop the payment. Unfortunately the money had been collected.
At a recent network meeting of a group who deal with fraud and whose organisations had put an incredible effort into warning people about scamming, most commented "what more can we do to protect people from themselves". One organisation even admitted a Branch Manager had been scammed.
The best way to protect yourself don't send money to anyone unless you know who they are or can verify their credientals. If you have any doubts, don't send the money. The adage "if it looks to good, it is" should be heeded.
If you are using Ebay or Trade Me, when purchasing an item of some substance, put your money in the Trust arrangement that is available and only have it released when you are happy with the item purchased. The few dollars involved could save you much anguish. I am amazed that individuals purchase items for thousands and don't use this safe guard.
However, this growth in internet business transactions has increasingly exposed the user of the facilities to a greater threat of theft of identity, funds and goods, often described in terms of scamming. Some may think that only vulnerable or those who are not well endowed intellectually fall prey to these scammers. That is not the case, and we even saw a week ago that the much maligned Hotchin, a Director of Hanover, was successfully scammed by some locals, that is, New Zealanders. He was apparently taken in by the promise of some very high returns on his funds.
In the last 12 months, the Ministry of Consumer Affairs has estimated that over $448 million was scammed from New Zealanders in the last 12 months. When I speak with Community Groups they are incredulous of this amount being scammed from New Zealanders. They ask, "what were these people thinking about". New Zealanders are often characterised as being a trusting group who can be a "soft touch" for tragic/sad stories. These are great characteristics to have but can make New Zealanders extra vulnerable to the scammers, both external and internal.
I have been informed of people being scammed as a result of internet friendships promising love some time down the track. People looking and convinced they have found a soul mate. These have ranged to as much as $750,000 in 6 weeks - and not always to the Nigerian scammers. Some of these scammers are in well developed European countries. These scammers once they have the person on the hook know exactly what buttons to push to keep the victim in play.
So don't be under any illusion that scammers only come from places like Nigeria. I have personally dealt with a number of people who have been scammed from overseas scammers and individuals residing overseas by New Zealand scammers. Only last weekend, I had someone get in touch about an apartment they thought they had rented in the UK. Once they had sent the money they knew that they had been scammed and were asking me how they could stop the payment. Unfortunately the money had been collected.
At a recent network meeting of a group who deal with fraud and whose organisations had put an incredible effort into warning people about scamming, most commented "what more can we do to protect people from themselves". One organisation even admitted a Branch Manager had been scammed.
The best way to protect yourself don't send money to anyone unless you know who they are or can verify their credientals. If you have any doubts, don't send the money. The adage "if it looks to good, it is" should be heeded.
If you are using Ebay or Trade Me, when purchasing an item of some substance, put your money in the Trust arrangement that is available and only have it released when you are happy with the item purchased. The few dollars involved could save you much anguish. I am amazed that individuals purchase items for thousands and don't use this safe guard.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
PROTECTING THE VULNERABLE
A new law is about to come into force which will in essence hold people accountable for not taking action when they are well aware of vulnerable people being abused. Anyone who is aware of the terrible domestic violence and child abuse figures in New Zealand will acknowledge that something more has to be done to protect the most vulnerable in our society. I think the time for talking is well passed and now some concrete action needs to occur.
The Law Commission has recommended what is being introduced by the Government. The following web page provides details www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4879519/Bill-may-extend-reporting-of-abuse-to-neighbours Also in this article issues have been raised by two groups about the implications of this law. Although their concerns are acknowledged it would be nice if some confidence was given to those who have to apply the law. We cannot continue to do nothing as the number of interventions per year for domestic violence and child abuse of nearly 100,000 is totally unacceptable in any society.
Crimestoppers provides a very easy way to raise concerns about domestic violence/child abuse without the person providing the information being seen as a "nosey parker". Some children would be still alive today if there had been a "nosey parker" to save them. The Crimestoppers number 0800 555 111 is a 24/7 line or the online encrypted message form of the website www.crimestoppers-nz.org can be used.
The Law Commission has recommended what is being introduced by the Government. The following web page provides details www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/4879519/Bill-may-extend-reporting-of-abuse-to-neighbours Also in this article issues have been raised by two groups about the implications of this law. Although their concerns are acknowledged it would be nice if some confidence was given to those who have to apply the law. We cannot continue to do nothing as the number of interventions per year for domestic violence and child abuse of nearly 100,000 is totally unacceptable in any society.
Crimestoppers provides a very easy way to raise concerns about domestic violence/child abuse without the person providing the information being seen as a "nosey parker". Some children would be still alive today if there had been a "nosey parker" to save them. The Crimestoppers number 0800 555 111 is a 24/7 line or the online encrypted message form of the website www.crimestoppers-nz.org can be used.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)