Child
rearing: Too many cooks ...
Ruby Harrold-Claesson, Attorney-at-law,
President of the NCHR/NKMR
|
Ruby
Harrold-Claesson, attorney-at-law is president of The NCHR The first
paragraph of this article is the combination of the introductions to two articles
that were written for the Telegraph and the Guardian. While the Telegraph has not
replied, the Guardian has informed in an e-mail on October 31, 2006, that
"it is extremely unlikely that the Guardian will publish articles that
we have not commissioned." |
In recent articles published in the Telegraph
(17/10), "Beware of Supernanny's naughty step treatment, parents are
warned", and the Guardian (19/10), "A national naughty
step", Sarah Womack and Fiona Millar tell of how parenting groups have taken issue
with Supernanny, the Channel 4 programme, also shown on Swedish TV, about the
suitability of the naughty step - or "time out" method - to
discipline children.
I have seen a few of these episodes and, at the
outset, I must say that am quite surprised that Swedish TV4 dared to broadcast those programs considering their
contents. The Swedish anti-smacking law forbids the use of "time out"
or sending a child to its room, "room arrest".
Since Sweden is upheld as the example for other
countries to follow, I'll elaborate on a few points:
The Swedish anti-smacking law reads:
"Children are entitled to care, security and a good upbringing. Children
are to be treated with respect for their person and individuality and may not
be subjected to physical punishment or any other humiliating treatment". This law was passed in 1979 to
commemorate the United Nations Year of the Child. It was passed by an
overwhelming majority of MPs. Only six MPs voted against it.
Those in favour of the law claimed that they
were protecting children from their abusive parents. However, the abuses to
which children have been exposed since the passing of the law are in no way in
proportion to the smacks that they might have had from their parents.
The greatest harm that is being done to
children in Sweden today is not caused by parents who discipline, but by
unnecessary state intervention into their private and family lives. Since the
beginning of the 1970s, parents have been indoctrinated in the modern
philosophy that children should have "free upbringing". Free
upbringing came to mean freedom from upbringing. The state agencies took over
and parents have been forced to abdicate from their positions of authority for
their children - on pain of prison and the loss of their children to the state.
The Swedish
anti-smacking law is to be found in the Parents and Guardianship Code. Being a
civil law, the anti-smacking law carries no sanctions whatsoever, however there
is an indirect link to the Criminal Code, because smacking is called
"child abuse". A smacking parent - if reported - ends up before the
police, the prosecutor, the judge in the Criminal courts, the social workers
and the judge in the administrative courts. The reason for this is that the
preliminary works of the law rank all physical punishment of children i.
e a slap on the hand, on the cheek or on the bottom, as assault and battery.
Sending children to their room is regarded as "other humiliating
treatment" and even "physical punishment" because the child is
physically excluded from the company of the rest of the family.
Supernanny's
sending children to the
naughty step - or "time out" to their room is therefore in
direct violation of Swedish law. This puts children and their parents at risk.
Formerly, parents used their common sense methods to discipline their
children. In Sweden, before 1979, parents were required by law to correct their
children but the
parents were
not to use other disciplinary methods than
those that were suitable taking into consideration the child's age and other
circumstances.
In 1979 came the blanket prohibition against
smacking no matter what the child had done. Thousands of Swedish parents have
been prosecuted since then and for fear of the punishments meted out to
punishing parents, most parents have been forced to abdicate and their children
have become quite out of control. The children have been indoctrinated by
day-care and school staff that they are "unbeatable", to use a
well-known expression from the anti-smacking lobby. Chaos reigns in the homes
and in the schools.
Discipline became a
despised word - a word that should not be used by parents in child rearing and
neither by teachers in the schools. But since the beginning of the 1990s many
leading persons in Sweden have reacted to the fact that Swedish children are
wild and lacking in discipline.
In an article "Youngsters must meet a firm reaction", published in the Swedish Daily on September 5, 1993, former Justice Minister, Mrs Gun Hellsvik, and former School Minister, now Justice Minister, Mrs Beatrice Ask, asserted that Sweden needs a new family policy. They criticised the social democrats aversion towards the family and their general lack of principles was promoted as a political goal during the sixties and seventies. They wrote: "Adults have a responsibility to teach the youth what is right and wrong. Parents have a particular responsibility towards their children. ... Young persons who break rules must learn to take the consequences and expect to meet a firm reaction. The State shall in every respect facilitate parents and among others teachers to fulfil their educational tasks." (My italics)
"It is high time to let parents and the teaching staff take responsibility for the youth in our society. If we fail to do that we will fail our children!"
In 1995, Professor Jacob W. F. Sundberg, the former rapporteur to the
European Commission for Human Rights, published his booklet "The Trip to Nowhere. Family Policy in the Swedish Welfare State"
. Professor Sundberg describes how in the
beginning of the 1970s Swedish Family Law suddenly hit a crisis. What was old was
thrown overboard and the course was changed towards completely new directions.
He discusses at length the case Olsson v. Sweden, where Sweden was found guilty
of violating the Olssons' private and family life by taking their children into
foster care.
On August 16, 2003 the Swedish columnist, Linda Skugge wrote: "We
are bringing up a generation of monsters", and on July 4, 2005, the
journalist Roger Lord wrote the article: "The
children are embarrassing Sweden".
Despite the negative Swedish experiences, certain politicians in other
countries, encouraged by the UN and UNICEF, are trying to enforce similar
legislation.
Here is a real life case from my legal
practice. It is that of the compulsory taking of seven siblings by the
municipality of Svalöv and placing them in foster care. Their father was
accused of "disturbance of peace" of his children, including
"room arrest". On October 16, 2003, he was arrested and remanded in
custody pending trial. The mother was not accused of any misdemeanours, yet all
the children were immediately placed in foster care. On November 27, 2003, the
father was completely acquitted in the criminal case. However, only last week,
October 13, 2006, they lost yet another attempt to regain custody of their
children.
Judging from the case above, Supernanny's
teachings about the naughty step - or "time out" method - to
discipline children, are dangerous for the parents and children of Sweden.
State intimidation of parents has led to lack
of confidence in parenting that former generations had. In 1997, Anne Davis
wrote her book "Confident Parenting"
after she had had an altercation with the social services. Anne Davis made
national headlines when, as a child-minder, she refused to promise that she
would never smack children in her care.
The fact that children and youngsters are now
totally out of control has opened a market for parenting gurus. On April 1,
2003, Swedish Radio broadcasted a program "New
method helps parents regain power", in which the MST (multi
systemic therapy), from USA was presented as the solution to children ruling
their parents.
Since then
we have had Supernanny. There
are just too many cooks...