"HILDREN" AND THE LAW.

Auckland Star, Volume LX, Issue 85, 11 April 1929, Page 8

"HILDREN" AND THE LAW.

"DRASTIC" WELFARE ACT.

(To the Editor.)

The honorary secretary of the Women'* National Council (Auckland) takes exception to remarks of mine re the Child Welfare Act. I shall reply as briefly as possible, though columns might be written on the drastic effects of that enactment. The secretary savs "the Child Welfare Act only makes provision for children under seventeen." This is not quite so. A "child" who has once come under that Act may be kept in a kind of vassalage until twentv-one, or even later. A special clause allows this. As typical, one young fellow complained that he could not get his saved wage* from the Department even at twenty-one, and the legal authority informed him that owing to this "tyrannical and clumsy legislation" he had no claim at any time. 1 do not say that this story is true, but it has been published. "Beyond the Child Welfare Act there is no other statute dealing with uncontrollable, wayward and rebellious children," so says the secretary. On the contrary, a parent can always appeal to a magistrate to have the wage-earning young person returned home if he or she leaves it for bad purposes. Surelv it is proper that the young person should have a right to state his case if thus accused. There is a lull in the fight against cabarets at present, but I am aware that many of these new laws are aimed against the young girl at such resorts. My own experience is, however, that the children of workers, factory workers and domestic helps are the ones who do not frequent these places, and the young ladies who "dance on the tables'' belong to a "higher"' social status. Theso laugh at the proposed policewoman act or existing child welfare courts because they know there is not the slightest chance of their being reported to them. To some of us who know how this kind of legislation works it is surprising that women's organisations (some of them) should want to make young women liable to be reported on by policemen or women for "rebelliousness." A vague charge like this is far more a reflection on such a young working woman than a definite one. for in the former case her little world (which always gets to know about it) thinks the worst". In conclusion, may I express my appreciation of the good work done by the National Council of Women in general? SHIRLEY.