Maxim Institute - real issues - No. 293
Real Issues No. 293 – Paternity, Victim's Rights,
MMP
Maxim Institute - real issues - No. 293
20 March
2008
www.maxim.org.nz
Paternity problems
Right for
victims?
Crossing the threshold
IN THE NEWS
An
interglobal conscience
Parenting finds a
place
PATERNITY PROBLEMS
Fatherlessness is a devastating
and cruel epidemic, robbing children of
paternal care,
and the support and boundaries fathers can bring. It
rips
away from children part of their identity and
belonging. This is especially
the case when the father of
a child is unknown or disputed; having a dad
away from
home is bad, but having a blank space on the birth
certificate
(as approximately seven percent of children
do), and in the heart, is
worse. This is why United
Future MP Judy Turner's new private member's Bill
is so
desperately needed.
Introduced to Parliament last week,
the Family Proceedings (Paternity
Orders and Parentage
Tests) Amendment Bill allows fathers, or
suspected
fathers, the ability to request a DNA test from
the Family Court. Under the
current law, only mothers, or
those associated with them, can make such a
request. The
Bill would extend this privilege to the supposed father,
and
'empower' the Family Court to 'order' a paternity
test to be taken, instead
of just 'recommend[ing]' one.
In essence, unless there is a compelling
reason
otherwise, the Bill allows men who have 'reasonable grounds
to
believe' they are or are not 'the father of a child,'
to have their
paternity established or refuted. This is a
vast improvement on the current
law, which allows mothers
to refuse a paternity test, and fathers little
choice or
recourse in the face of a refusal.
There are three main
reasons the Bill is vital and needed. One is
simply
practical; child support should be collected from
the right man, and the
easier it is to establish the
right and responsible man, the better. But
more broadly,
changing the law recognises that men have a right, and
a
responsibility for their actions, and their children.
There are two parents
who contribute to making a child,
not just one, and the law should
recognise that both have
an equal stake. And more importantly still,
paternity is
not simply a matter of the relationship (or lack
thereof)
between the two parents. It is also important
for the child's well-being,
security and identity. We can
not always prevent mistakes, the breakdown
of
relationships or the consequences of human frailty.
But we can act to keep
the main thing, the main thing --
the interests of the child -- and limit
the damage. If it
is at all possible, children have a right to a father
--
if not in the home, at least on the piece of
paper.
Read the Family Proceedings (Paternity Orders and
Parentage Tests)
Amendment
Bill
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/member/2008/0202-1/latest/DLM1206502.html
RIGHT FOR VICTIMS?
Crime happens. The aftermath can be long and
is inevitably painful as we
attempt to bring justice and
reconciliation to people and communities. The
question of
how to care for victims in the aftermath of crime was
brought
to the forefront this week, when the Government
tabled their response to
the Justice and Electoral
Committee's Inquiry into Victims' Rights.
The
Government's response to the issue of victims' rights
makes some valuable
operational changes but only touches
the shallow surface of a problem that
is more deeply
wedded to our understanding of crime and punishment.
The
core problem facing victims of crime is a criminal justice
system that
isolates people, both victims and
perpetrators, by focusing on crime
exclusively as a
violation against the state, rather than also the
person
or people who are victims. In dealing with crime
as an impersonal act, we
continue the seclusion of
individuals from society, which forms a breeding
ground
for further crime. If we are going to genuinely confront
crime and
support its victims, it is crucial that we
revive our understanding of
connection and community as
the heart of healthy society.
This is vitally important
for the victim in receiving recognition of the
damage
done to them, but also for the offender in recognising the
personal
consequences of their actions. As Joseph Conrad
wrote in Lord Jim: 'The
real significance of crime is in
its being a breach of faith with the
community of
mankind.' The Government response announced this week
includes
the setting up of a national helpline for
victims to receive support and
advice. This is in
addition to a Victims' Charter that will outline
the
services victims are entitled to receive. These are
all good things, but
fail to go deeper. More is required
if we are to truly confront the
paradigm in which we
address offending.
One approach to criminal justice,
largely pioneered in New Zealand, is the
use of
restorative justice practices. Conferences are held
connecting
victims and offenders, allowing them to meet
and talk about the
consequences of the crime. The victim
is empowered as they take a central
role in the process.
The offender is given the chance to re-engage,
albeit
painfully, with other human beings as they are
made aware of the
consequences of their choices on other
human beings. As barriers to
relationship are minimised
and people are invited into the judicial
process, a new
possibility for restoration emerges. Responsibility
and
empathy are given a chance to breathe. It is
encouraging to see that the
Government currently supports
restorative justice practice, but it needs to
follow
through more convincingly and entrench such practices as a
more
central part of the system. Currently it is a small
alternative to the
mainstream system. We need to
encourage it to grow and expand as a
challenge to the
impersonal system we currently live with.
Read the
Government Response to the Report of the Justice and
Electoral
Committee on Inquiry into Victims'
Rights
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/C38E428B-7931-4331-AB25-3B8C4AAE64B9/79197/DBHOH_PAP_16376_5864.pdf
Read
the Justice and Electoral Committee Report on Inquiry into
Victims'
Rights
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/606A1947-C122-42D2-8FD1-4C2276AF9D26/71547/DBSCH_SCR_3953_5753.pdf
Read
Maxim Institute's submission on the Inquiry into Victims'
Rights
http://www.maxim.org.nz/files/pdf/submission_victimsrights.pdf
CROSSING THE THRESHOLD
A study of how well New Zealanders
understand the electoral system has
revealed that many
people still do not completely understand how it
works.
The findings come from the Electoral Commission's
mid-term monitor survey
of 3,000 voters, collected during
June and July 2007. While the study found
that 51 percent
of New Zealanders say they either find MMP easy or
very
easy to understand, the study also showed that New
Zealanders' 'declared'
level of understanding of MMP is
not as good as their 'actual'
understanding of it. Faced
with a general election in 2008, these results
mean that
voters need to be attentive to the finer details of how
MMP
works, so that we can understand fully the
implications of voting for
particular electorate
candidates or parties.
New Zealanders' actual
understanding of MMP was investigated by asking
them
which of the two votes voters cast at an election
'is more important in
deciding the number of MPs each
party will have in Parliament': the party
vote or the
electorate vote. Only 65 percent of New Zealanders
understood
correctly that the party vote is more
important in deciding the number of
MPs each party will
have in Parliament. People were also asked to
identify
the criteria which parties have to satisfy to
win seats in parliament. The
alarming finding was that
after more than a decade of MMP only 27 percent
of voters
understood that parties can win seats by either winning
five
percent of all party votes or by winning one
electorate seat. Another 27
percent were unsure of what
the threshold criteria are at all.
One reason for the low
levels of understanding might be that a number of
the
smaller parties, like Act and the Progressives, won an
electorate seat
in the 2005 election, bringing a
proportionate number of other MPs with
them into
Parliament according to their share of the party
vote.
Nevertheless, these findings are consistent with
research carried out by
the New Zealand Electoral Study
at the 2005 election which showed a similar
proportion of
New Zealanders did not know or understand what the
threshold
criteria is.
These findings have important
implications for voting at the coming
election. Most of
the smaller political parties are polling below the
five
percent threshold, yet together they might still win
a number of the seats
in parliament if they win
electorate seats. This will influence the range
of
partners the major parties will have to negotiate with to
form a
government. While most New Zealanders now
understand the party vote is the
most important vote,
more voters need to understand that under MMP winning
an
electorate seat is another way which parties can enter
parliament, and
have an effect on government.
Read the
Electoral Commission's full monitor report, Understanding of
MMP
http://www.elections.org.nz/uploads/final-fullreport-understanding_of_mmp-oct07.pdf
IN THE NEWS
AN INTERGLOBAL CONSCIENCE
A new paper published
by the Heritage Foundation looks at the current
political
situation in Kenya, and makes suggestions for the best way
that
the United States can act to help improve this
crisis. The paper recognises
the interdependence that
exists between countries, and encourages a greater
civil
society approach to ensure the stability of Kenya.
The
paper, written by Tom Woods, outlines the Kenyan political
crisis,
which has seen an outbreak in ethnic violence
following the 2007 elections.
He pinpoints the trouble to
two leaders -- Mwai Kibaki and Raila Odinga --
who have
an ongoing and uneasy relationship. He suggests due to
the
'wide-ranging interests' that the United States has
in Kenya, that there is
'leverage' for diplomats to have
an influence in the distressed state. He
recommends that
instead of the US penalising Kenyan citizens by pulling
out
aid and investments and enforcing trade sanctions,
they should instead
focus on penalising corrupt
individuals, and continue to channel
non-military aid
through civil society organisations, rather
than
government agencies.
Read Kenya's Stability is an
Important U.S.
Priority
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Africa/wm1852.cfm
PARENTING FINDS A PLACE
Auckland-based parenting organisation,
Parents Inc., has just opened a new
centre to the public
devoted solely to the art of Parenting. The centre
offers
a wide range of facilities to parents including a cafe,
bookshop and
seminars, and will have staff and volunteers
on-site to give advice and
support. It also allows
parents to access information using touch-screens
and
aims to give support to parents with children of all
ages.
This is an excellent initiative and a significant
step towards helping
ensure the future of effective
parenting in our country. The centre is sure
is to be an
excellent resource for any parent.
Visit The Parenting
Place
website
https://www.parentsinc.org.nz/the-parenting-place-2/
TALKING POINT
'When you have victims and their families talking
about the horrendous pain
and confusion and powerlessness
in their lives, it has a really powerful
resonance on
everyone who's in that process. The offenders are naked
for
the first time ... having to face (what they've done)
without a lawyer or
someone making excuses.'
Terry O'Connell
A registered charitable trust, funded by
donations, Maxim Institute values
your interest and
support.
Click here to find out how you can support Maxim
Institute Maxim
Institute's regular email publication, Real Issues,
provides Maxim Institute. 49 Cape Horn
Road, Hillsborough, Auckland, New
Zealand. ends
thought-provoking analysis of developments in
policy and culture in New
Zealand and around the world.
You can express you views on any of the
articles featured
in Real Issues by writing a letter to the editor.
A
selection of the best letters will be posted each week
on Maxim Institute's
website