Despair - Why aren't we protecting our kids!

Forums › Off topic › Despair - Why aren't we protecting our kids!

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14

Networkn
32198 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1567993 8-Jun-2016 15:33

Yet still an accident.

There is a clear difference between intentionally abusing a child (where the child is hated and disliked by caregivers) and failing to provide a safe environment (where the child may be in an otherwise good family unit).

Don't see why you can't see the difference. It is important to differentiate between active abuse and accidents because they require different solutions.

If you take your simple approach of lumping all injuries together regardless of intent then you will fail to solve much at all.

The topic is about failure to protect our kids, most accidents are preventable, and intentional harm still falls under failure to protect.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1567999 8-Jun-2016 15:41

surfisup1000:

networkn:

There is no such thing as a blameless accident when a firearm is involved with a child. If the PARENTS are PROTECTING the CHILD then this could not have happened, regardless of what "this" is.

Yet still an accident.

There is a clear difference between intentionally abusing a child (where the child is hated and disliked by caregivers) and failing to provide a safe environment (where the child may be in an otherwise good family unit).

Don't see why you can't see the difference. It is important to differentiate between active abuse and accidents because they require different solutions.

If you take your simple approach of lumping all injuries together regardless of intent then you will fail to solve much at all.

I was at least failing to protect and provide good care for a child and negligence resulting in death of a two year old. It was a completely avoidable death.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1568000 8-Jun-2016 15:42

networkn: intentional harm still falls under failure to protect.

You see, I completely disagree.

"intentional harm still falls under failure to protect"

A parent who intentionally smashes their kid with a stick and breaks the kids arm is a completely different situation to a parent who does not install a deck handrail and a kid falls off a deck and breaks their arm.

You trying to equate intentional abuse being the same as failure to provide a safe environment is completely wrong. Intentional abuse will cause harm 100% of the time. Failing to provide a safe environment may or may not cause harm. And the motivation behind both things is quite different.

networkn

Networkn
32198 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1568002 8-Jun-2016 15:44

surfisup1000:

You see, I completely disagree.

That's no problem, you are welcome to be wrong :)

Failure to protect is just that, intent isn't what I am lamenting. Reality is, if all parents did a better job at protecting their kids, a lot less kids get hurt.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1568003 8-Jun-2016 15:45

MikeB4:

I was at least failing to protect and provide good care for a child and negligence resulting in death of a two year old. It was a completely avoidable death.

I agree, but there is a difference between failing to protect and active abuse.

Networkn seems to think they are similar.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1568004 8-Jun-2016 15:46

Anyway , i give up.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1568005 8-Jun-2016 15:47

surfisup1000:

MikeB4:

I was at least failing to protect and provide good care for a child and negligence resulting in death of a two year old. It was a completely avoidable death.

I agree, but there is a difference between failing to protect and active abuse.

Networkn seems to think they are similar.

You are correct there is a difference between failing to protect and active abuse.

networkn

Networkn
32198 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1568007 8-Jun-2016 15:49

MikeB4:

surfisup1000:

MikeB4:

I was at least failing to protect and provide good care for a child and negligence resulting in death of a two year old. It was a completely avoidable death.

I agree, but there is a difference between failing to protect and active abuse.

Networkn seems to think they are similar.

You are correct there is a difference between failing to protect and active abuse.

Well if you protect your kids, they aren't getting actively abused. It encompasses both.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1568024 8-Jun-2016 15:56

frankv:

An underclass without opportunities. A person with no fulfilment in their lives and crappy living conditions has nothing to lose; prison is really not much different from daily life. The only escape, albeit short-term, from this situation is drugs and alcohol. And sex. Children are not valued because (a) they're a drain on meagre resources, and (b) they have no future either. Under these circumstances, it's not surprising that they become victims of violence. Note that this isn't a cultural or racial issue; it's a social and economic one.

Rikkitic:

Create poverty, lack of opportunity, hopelessness, you create violence, brutality and despair. It is not about money, but in one sense it is. People have to be able to see a way out. Towns in decay tend to create residents in decay. People lose their ability to care. I don't think that is specific to any cultural group, but it happens most to the one on the bottom. Unfortunately, the culture on top that does not have that problem tends to blame the victims so the cycle continues.

At the root cause of this isn't absolute poverty but relative poverty. The latter is often dismissed as irrelevant because there's very little absolute poverty in NZ, and for those in relative poverty (most anyway), there is a "safety net" of a generous welfare system (by world standards).

There's a problem a meritocratic system - it works in reverse. Those arguing vehemently that the most able thoroughly deserve the rewards (including respect) for achievement haver a good point, unfortunately in every instance where there's an appalling report of some tragedy in the underclass (which absolutely exists in NZ) there's a reaction from some offering extremely damning stereotypes of beneficiaries, those with a criminal history, those with substance abuse issues etc. There's not much chance of redemption in Godzone - it's an uphill battle few will be able to make once you're at the bottom of the meritocratic scale. Help might be there (material support), but very little sympathy.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1568028 8-Jun-2016 16:03

Fred99:

frankv:

An underclass without opportunities. A person with no fulfilment in their lives and crappy living conditions has nothing to lose; prison is really not much different from daily life. The only escape, albeit short-term, from this situation is drugs and alcohol. And sex. Children are not valued because (a) they're a drain on meagre resources, and (b) they have no future either. Under these circumstances, it's not surprising that they become victims of violence. Note that this isn't a cultural or racial issue; it's a social and economic one.

Rikkitic:

Create poverty, lack of opportunity, hopelessness, you create violence, brutality and despair. It is not about money, but in one sense it is. People have to be able to see a way out. Towns in decay tend to create residents in decay. People lose their ability to care. I don't think that is specific to any cultural group, but it happens most to the one on the bottom. Unfortunately, the culture on top that does not have that problem tends to blame the victims so the cycle continues.

At the root cause of this isn't absolute poverty but relative poverty. The latter is often dismissed as irrelevant because there's very little absolute poverty in NZ, and for those in relative poverty (most anyway), there is a "safety net" of a generous welfare system (by world standards).

There's a problem a meritocratic system - it works in reverse. Those arguing vehemently that the most able thoroughly deserve the rewards (including respect) for achievement haver a good point, unfortunately in every instance where there's an appalling report of some tragedy in the underclass (which absolutely exists in NZ) there's a reaction from some offering extremely damning stereotypes of beneficiaries, those with a criminal history, those with substance abuse issues etc. There's not much chance of redemption in Godzone - it's an uphill battle few will be able to make once you're at the bottom of the meritocratic scale. Help might be there (material support), but very little sympathy.

To complicate issues domestic abuse is across socio-economic groups, it is more accurate to say that one of the causes or catalysts is relative poverty.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1568032 8-Jun-2016 16:07

I feel there should be a multi partisan approach taken with this and forget party lines etc. There needs to be a bringing together of all representative groups in an attempt to address this shocking situation we have here in NZ. As a nation we have to address this and we have to try to solve it for the sake of our future.

gzt

16902 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1568048 8-Jun-2016 16:37

OECD Stats:

http://infogr.am/annual_abuse_death_rates_for_children

Originally published with article at Stuff.

Edit: tried to link as image, no dice. Feel free.

MikeAqua

7769 posts

Uber Geek

#1568064 8-Jun-2016 16:47

Leaving a loaded gun within access of kids is absolutely galactically, fecklessly, criminally stupid.

If they guy has any ticker (I'm guessing not) he will plead guilty.

"Why aren't we protecting our kids?"

Well I am - protecting my kids. They eat well, go to school, do there homework, play sport, have hobbies and are safe, warm and dry at home.

I also pay a shed load of tax every year for government to support services that are supposed to protect kids - generally part of the supposed social benefit of paying tax.

I myself don't know any families where kids are evidently at risk. My friends and associates are educated, civilised, professional people. In the unlikely event they were to abuse their kids, they would be smart enough to effectively hide it from me. I have never seen a situation where a kid was being mistreated in public.

Mike

jmh

458 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1568073 8-Jun-2016 16:52

Fred99:

frankv:

An underclass without opportunities. A person with no fulfilment in their lives and crappy living conditions has nothing to lose; prison is really not much different from daily life. The only escape, albeit short-term, from this situation is drugs and alcohol. And sex. Children are not valued because (a) they're a drain on meagre resources, and (b) they have no future either. Under these circumstances, it's not surprising that they become victims of violence. Note that this isn't a cultural or racial issue; it's a social and economic one.

Rikkitic:

Create poverty, lack of opportunity, hopelessness, you create violence, brutality and despair. It is not about money, but in one sense it is. People have to be able to see a way out. Towns in decay tend to create residents in decay. People lose their ability to care. I don't think that is specific to any cultural group, but it happens most to the one on the bottom. Unfortunately, the culture on top that does not have that problem tends to blame the victims so the cycle continues.

At the root cause of this isn't absolute poverty but relative poverty. The latter is often dismissed as irrelevant because there's very little absolute poverty in NZ, and for those in relative poverty (most anyway), there is a "safety net" of a generous welfare system (by world standards).

There's a problem a meritocratic system - it works in reverse. Those arguing vehemently that the most able thoroughly deserve the rewards (including respect) for achievement haver a good point, unfortunately in every instance where there's an appalling report of some tragedy in the underclass (which absolutely exists in NZ) there's a reaction from some offering extremely damning stereotypes of beneficiaries, those with a criminal history, those with substance abuse issues etc. There's not much chance of redemption in Godzone - it's an uphill battle few will be able to make once you're at the bottom of the meritocratic scale. Help might be there (material support), but very little sympathy.

You may have seen this but if not, Alain de Botton gave a great Ted talk on the down side of meritocracy. The key point is at 6.04.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1568179 8-Jun-2016 20:04

MikeB4:

Fred99:

frankv:

An underclass without opportunities. A person with no fulfilment in their lives and crappy living conditions has nothing to lose; prison is really not much different from daily life. The only escape, albeit short-term, from this situation is drugs and alcohol. And sex. Children are not valued because (a) they're a drain on meagre resources, and (b) they have no future either. Under these circumstances, it's not surprising that they become victims of violence. Note that this isn't a cultural or racial issue; it's a social and economic one.

Rikkitic:

Create poverty, lack of opportunity, hopelessness, you create violence, brutality and despair. It is not about money, but in one sense it is. People have to be able to see a way out. Towns in decay tend to create residents in decay. People lose their ability to care. I don't think that is specific to any cultural group, but it happens most to the one on the bottom. Unfortunately, the culture on top that does not have that problem tends to blame the victims so the cycle continues.

At the root cause of this isn't absolute poverty but relative poverty. The latter is often dismissed as irrelevant because there's very little absolute poverty in NZ, and for those in relative poverty (most anyway), there is a "safety net" of a generous welfare system (by world standards).

There's a problem a meritocratic system - it works in reverse. Those arguing vehemently that the most able thoroughly deserve the rewards (including respect) for achievement haver a good point, unfortunately in every instance where there's an appalling report of some tragedy in the underclass (which absolutely exists in NZ) there's a reaction from some offering extremely damning stereotypes of beneficiaries, those with a criminal history, those with substance abuse issues etc. There's not much chance of redemption in Godzone - it's an uphill battle few will be able to make once you're at the bottom of the meritocratic scale. Help might be there (material support), but very little sympathy.

To complicate issues domestic abuse is across socio-economic groups, it is more accurate to say that one of the causes or catalysts is relative poverty.

Absolutely true.

However I expect that in the socio-economic bell curve, those at the far left hand side of the chart are hugely overrepresented in stats.

1 | ... | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14