Crimes (Substituted Section 59) Amendment Act 2007 - Legal Context

Legal Context

Section 59 now reads as follows"

59 Parental control
(1) Every parent of a child and every person in the place of a parent of the child is justified in using force if the force used is reasonable in the circumstances and is for the purpose of—

(a) preventing or minimising harm to the child or another person; or

(b) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in conduct that amounts to a criminal offence; or

(c) preventing the child from engaging or continuing to engage in offensive or disruptive behaviour; or

(d) performing the normal daily tasks that are incidental to good care and parenting.

(2) Nothing in subsection (1) or in any rule of common law justifies the use of force for the purpose of correction.
(3) Subsection (2) prevails over subsection (1).
(4) To avoid doubt, it is affirmed that the Police have the discretion not to prosecute complaints against a parent of a child or person in the place of a parent of a child in relation to an offence involving the use of force against a child, where the offence is considered to be so inconsequential that there is no public interest in proceeding with a prosecution.

Adults assaulting children no longer have the legal defence of "reasonable force" but "force ... may ... be for the purposes of restraint ... or, by way of example, to ensure compliance", according to the police practice guide.

A consequential amendment was also made by the Act to section 139A of the Education Act 1989 – the enactment criminalising school corporal punishment – by removing the exemption of parents administering corporal punishment to their children at school. In one case in February 2007, just prior to the bill's second reading, it was found that a Christian school in southern Auckland was using this loophole in the law by making parents administer corporal punishment in response to a student's misbehaviour.