CHILD WELFARE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXII, Issue 95, 23 April 1931, Page 23

CHILD WELFARE.

In connection with a letter on child welfare signed "Nemo," I think it is only fair to Mrs. Soljak to tell him that, so far from playing a "lone battle," she has numbers of people—parents, etc.— behind her in her objection to the Act as at present constituted and administered. With the exception of Mr. Cutten, S.M., who seems to think the whole thing absolutely perfect, the social workers "Nemo" mentions have admitted that the Act needs some amendment. Even Major Gordon said recently that the State wards are not treated quite fairly with regard to the amount of money they are allowed when they start work. Mrs. Soljak and those who support her are only asking that the Act shall be amended and improved. Surely that is not a crime, though the Department acts as if it were. Is "Nemo" aware that the discipline in the institutions under this Act is more severe than that of the prisons of the Dominion? Does he know that yoiing women of any age up to 21 are subjected to corporal punishment for breaches of the rules? Do "Nemo" and Major Gordon approve of that? This has never been sanctioned by Parliament —there is not a word about corporal punishment in the Act—the officials apparently make their own rules in these institutions. Three ex-State wards have signed affidavits before a J.P. testifying that this and other quite unnecessary humiliations are of constant occurrence in the State institutions, and two ex-officials corroborate them. Also we know that two girls have attempted suicide. Four months ago Mr. Atmore promised to investigate the complaints we laid before him, and we are still waiting for his rather belated statement. The Act is unpopular, and there must be a reason for it. The State is responsible for the welfare and happiness of these young people, and it is everyone's duty to insist that they shall be treated properly. EMILY GIBSON.