Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Child abuse article

Sir,—l commend Sharon Hunter for her article on child abuse in the “Childrens Planet." Mrs Nihoniho had not even seen the issue, and I believe she over-estimates the possible damage while underestimating the real worth of the article. Both the editorial and article take care to clarify what constitutes normal and abnormal parental punishments. Mrs Nihoniho admits that the problem of child abuse will not go away if ignored. The trouble is that many people do ignore it or are ignorant of it. The mere fact that the majority of cases of abuse are unrecorded indicates that this is a closed topic. Mrs Nihoniho believes it is better to inform children individually on this topic. However, because it is a closed subject, many do not feel free to talk about it as they internalise the guilt for the act.—Yours, etc.. MARIEKE HILHORST. January 18, 1982.

Sir,—Regardless of the rights or wrongs of the article on child abuse published in the "Children’s Planet,” I am appalled at the attitude of the Working Women’s Council as reported from its spokesman Mrs Nihoniho. According to “The Press” on January 19, the council has “demanded” the destruction of the offending issue. In "The Press" of January 18, Mrs Nihoniho condemned the article on the evidence of a radio report, though she had not seen it. If it has been correctly reported, such an attitude seems to me to be quite irresponsible; just as socially irresponsible as, for example, child abuse. It is prudent to read and consider before rushing into publicity.— Yours, etc.. PETER MEREDITH. January 19, 1982.

Sir.—Professor Ney ("The Press.” January 19) implies that impressionable little computers could be harmed by reading C.H.A.P.'s newspaper. Nonsense. Our computers (even one which is only a few weeks old) could read the “Planet" all day at high speed without coming to the least harm. Seriously, will our religious conservatives ever accept that open, honest discussion of real problems may help to solve them? Does it occur to them to ask children what they think? Must they always try to suppress truth instead of sharing it?—Yours, etc.. ALAN WILKINSON. January 19, 1982.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP19820120.2.92.3

Bibliographic details

Press, 20 January 1982, Page 18

Word Count
359

Child abuse article Press, 20 January 1982, Page 18

Child abuse article Press, 20 January 1982, Page 18

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert