Tag Archives: survey

In a curious govt backed appeal for Westpac Rescue Helicopter funding, why are NZ farmers being asked full details of all stock & food available?

“Why is a government agency fronting a funding drive for Westpac Helicopter? Is this agency acting as a Trojan horse, to gather detailed food crop information, not just about stock but all food available on farms?”

By Hilary Butler

I have some SERIOUS questions, about the motives of the NZ government.

Various properties have received letters like this, asking for funding for Westpac helicopter rescue… each letter is individualized with colour google maps of their properties with the boundaries delineated…

BUT>>>> have a look at the envelope and the information asked for on the last page. The whole letter plus the envelope was scanned, anonymized, marked up and put below, for you to study. Look at it carefully. You might have to look at this on a computer NOT on the phone. (You can also download the pdf at this link)

Some farmers receiving these letters are gobsmacked. But how many farmers are acquiescing to this information request without even asking what is behind it? Why is a government agency fronting a funding drive for Westpac Helicopter? Is this agency acting as a Trojan horse, to gather detailed food crop information, not just about stock but all food available on farms? Why do they require this information now? They never had in the past.

So first up, LOOK at the sender. https://www.asurequality.com/about/who-we-are/ Asure quality – an organisation which supposedly “offer the broadest range of food assurance services in New Zealand” and “guardians of food” and “Owned by the New Zealand Government,” to “to help build and protect this enduring trust in food”.

Is the Government involved in some underhand information mining so that they know exactly where to land helicopters to unlawfully take farmers produce in the event of a “nationwide food shortage”? The other thing concerning farmers, which has another COVID parallel, is when you hear farmers talk about the shocking devastation created by MBIE in relation to mico bovis. The farmers I’ve talked to, liken this to COVID in a way, because mico bovis has very few symptoms in cattle, meat is fine, milk is fine etc but the government answer is to kill all the animals. The reality though, is that eventually all stock will get it, form antibodies to it, and no harm on the produce. Instead of recognizing the reality of mico bovis, the government on the one hand, wants to disembowel farmers’ stock, yet NOW wants to know from all farmers, exactly what food supply they have on their farms.

Don’t you think that this is all a bit … weird?

If you agree with the concerns on this post please, spread this far and wide.

Parents outraged as US middle school students given a ‘Well-Child’ survey on graphic sex acts without their consent

“Have you ever had any type of sex – vaginal, anal, or oral sex? Have you ever been attracted to the same sex? Girl to girl or guy to guy? Or do you feel that you are gay, lesbian, or bisexual?” Willis read from the survey.

Wherever you stand on this issue the point being made is the lack of knowledge or consent for the parents of their 9-13 YOs being given this very controversial survey. Why does your child’s school need to have this info anyway? … The term ‘well-child’ is a familiar term here in NZ, the term given for early childhood health checks. Middle school (not a term widely used here) refers to 9-13 YOs. EWR


From CBN.com

Christin Willis was shocked and then outraged when she learned her middle-school-aged son – who just went in for a physical for football – ended up answering explicit sexual questions on a required survey at his school’s health center. The Oakdale, Louisiana mother told KPLC News 7 some of the survey questions crossed the line.

“Have you ever had any type of sex – vaginal, anal, or oral sex? Have you ever been attracted to the same sex? Girl to girl or guy to guy? Or do you feel that you are gay, lesbian, or bisexual?” Willis read from the survey.

Willis didn’t consent to her child being questioned. That only happened because her ex-husband gave permission, without her knowledge, for their son to get his football physical at the school’s clinic. Next thing you know, their middle-schooler was pulled out of class to take the survey. His father was not told about the survey, either.

Willis told 7News she believes the football physical provided a loophole to get her son to take the survey.

“I don’t even allow my son to go to the school-based health center. So the fact that he was questioned without letting me know is the most upsetting,” she said.

Willis later learned that the survey is required for all students who use the services of the school-based health center. And without the survey, the clinic does not get grant money to keep it running.

“I don’t like my child being used for you to get money for a system that I don’t support. We have a health care facility, we have a doctor. If I want to discuss sexually explicit things with my children, I’ll do so in my home or at my doctor’s office – his doctor’s office,” Willis told 7News.

Responding to the controversy, the Allen Parish School Board issued a statement saying the survey is one given nationwide and is part of the “well-child visit.” But the Board says it agrees with Willis’ objections to several of the questions and is “working to change or remove them.”

Additional funding for on-site health centers came from the Obamacare law (the Affordable Health Act), according to Breitbart News, with the support of the nation’s largest teachers unions. According to the latest census on school-based health care, there are nearly 2,000 centers nationwide.

Many parents, like Christin Willis, see the clinic survey as government intrusion into the rearing of their children and wonder why it’s any of the school’s business to ask such personal questions of students. With clinics located in schools all across the country, the question is, how many parents know about such surveys, and just how much more outrage might there be if they did?

SOURCE

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/us/2019/october/middle-school-parents-outraged-over-sex-survey-conducted-without-their-consent

Photo Credit: Pixabay.com

Setting the record straight – Pakeha kill just as many children as Maori do, despite Maori being reported by mainstream as the “face of abuse”

Pakeha kill just as many children as Maori do, despite Maori being the “face of abuse” Raema Merchant (Lecturer EIT; BSW, MSW)

In 2017, at least 45 babies were taken the day they were born, and more than half of the newborns were removed from young Māori mothers  Whanau Ora NZ, 26/6/19

Just a reminder for those I note on forums & social media who say ‘Māori should stop abusing their children’. We are hearing that the higher proportion of children/babies uplifted by NZ authorities have been Māori babies, and going by the mainstream media hype it would be difficult not to think that Maori were the top offenders.

Not so.

Raema Merchant’s doctorate research in 2011 revealed what mainstream is generally not telling us. They have in my opinion, much to answer for in this skewing of perception, both currently and historically. EWR

RELATED:
Child Abuse Reporting Biased And Sensationalised

Now Pakeha media have highlighted the horror of Oranga Tamariki’s theft of    Māori children – will Government be shamed into action?

 

From stuff.co.nz (2011)

Pakeha kill just as many children as Maori do, despite Maori being the “face of abuse” in the media, according to a researcher.

Social work lecturer Raema Merchant said focusing on Maori parents diverts attention away from the fact Pakeha can harm children too.

“I’m not denying it’s a problem for Maori, but if we’re just focusing on Maori we’re ignoring the Pakeha side,” she said.

“It’s almost as though Pakeha are putting their heads in the sand and saying there is no Pakeha child abuse.”

Her master’s thesis at Massey University found about half of the children killed in New Zealand died at the hands of a Pakeha abuser.

Almost 9000 children were victims of physical abuse between 2000 and 2008, yet only 21 became “household names”‘ in the media, she said.

Just one-third of child deaths were reported in the press, and they were predominantly Maori cases.

Merchant urged the public and media to focus on real problems of child abuse, rather than making Maori the “face of abuse”.

“The real danger I have seen from a social worker point of view is that there are a lot of children being abused but as far as the public are concerned they only seem to know about the ones that are Maori.

“Child abuse is a problem for all people, not just for Maori.”

Merchant is already planning her next thesis, which will look at a bigger issue: whether focusing on Maori child abuse victims leads to skewed views by health professionals and the public.

This could lead to a lack of awareness of abuse occurring in Pakeha families, she said.

Merchant found physical child abuse was largely related to poverty, poor housing, inter-generational abuse, poor parenting and drugs and alcohol abuse.

Her research comes after a recent poll revealed half of New Zealanders believe child abuse has an ethnic connection.

Research New Zealand conducted the survey on how New Zealanders view the causes of child abuse, asking respondents to rank the factors they believed most contributed to the problem.

Just over half the 503 people polled said child abuse was a cultural issue, while parental experience and economic factors shared equal status at about a third each.

Child Matters chief executive Anthea Simcock said abuse was not just about one culture.

“Child abuse is right across the spectrum.”

On average, one child is killed every five weeks in New Zealand, and most victims are less than a year old.

MINISTER SAYS PARENTS NEED HELP

Mums and dads would get preferential treatment for drug and mental health problems under a radical plan to address the nation’s shocking child abuse rate.

The government is braced for criticisms of suggested changes to the current system, where state assistance is allocated on individual need rather than whether dependent children are involved.

Mandatory reporting, a re-think of the whanau-first policy when children are removed from their parents’ care, and sharing information despite privacy concerns will also be on the table when the government releases its Green Paper next week on improving children’s lives.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett launched the review in April, saying she was incensed by the number of child abuse cases and wanted a national debate about how the problem should be tackled.

It will be launched in Auckland on Wednesday and there will be eight months of public consultation before a formal White Paper is released and the Children’s Action Plan is adopted next year.

Bennett said she was aware many of the topics in the Green Paper were controversial, but tough choices were needed to reduce child abuse.

She said she does not agree with some of the recommendations, but wants them discussed.

Barnardos boss Murray Edridge, former All Blacks hooker Norm Hewitt and former Families Commissioner Sandra Alofivae have been appointed to help lead public debate on the issues.

The more contentious topics include a legal requirement for professionals – including doctors, teachers and nurses – to report suspected child abuse cases, and monitoring at-risk children from birth in a national database.

Former Children’s Commissioner John Angus has said there are already enough reports of child abuse, and dealing with the cases properly was preferable to encouraging more reporting.

He said mandatory reporting would swamp Child Youth and Family.

Child abuse expert Patrick Kelly said many health professionals were not qualified enough to detect it.

Bennett said suggestions of greater information sharing between government agencies also extended to other family members and non-governmental organisations.

“We want to see children protected and in a safe environment, to do that we need to share information a lot more readily, and that does mean occasionally we’ll be sharing information on children who are not in danger.

“So is middle New Zealand ready for us to step into that area a bit?”

Putting parents ahead of other Kiwis in line for government services will also attract criticism.

“The example you could use is that mental health services be prioritised to mothers and fathers with small children.

“Does that mean other people wait longer?

“Should they be able to jump the queue because they have young children?”

It could also apply to drug and alcohol treatment, welfare, education and the rest of the health sector. Services are currently allocated based on need.

Bennett acknowledged that many people, particularly the elderly, would be put out by that.

“I get daily correspondence [from people] who are appalled and disgusted at those beautiful faces that they see, unfortunately week after week, who have been severely damaged or even killed at the hands of people who should be loving them.

“I suppose I’m saying to those people; what are you willing to give up for me to spend more resources on those very families?”

Three questions asked by the Green Paper: What priority should government give to the families and whanau of those caring for children when allocating services that impact on the children they are caring for? What services do you think should be included in this policy? When should adults who care for children be prioritised for services over others?

SOURCE:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/5331753/Pakeha-child-abuse-ignored-researcher