KEY POINTS:
Compulsory Plunket visits, Parenting education and media campaigns are just some of the ideas to combat family violence put forward by nzherald.co.nz readers.
Many readers have said compulsory Plunket visits would help authorities to monitor at risk children.
Olwyn from Auckland Central said restoring Plunket to "its former glory" and longer stays in hospital for new mothers would help.
"Instinct is not enough for humans, we have to learn how to look after our young," writes Olwyn.
Kaya from Glenfield agreed and wrote that in the UK new mothers stayed in hospital for up to four days and were shown the basics of nappy changing, washing and feeding.
"After hospital there were local baby clinics for each area. All mothers took their babies there every two weeks up until the age of two. Babies weight was taken and general well-being monitored. Advice and help was on hand, baby formula, bottles, nappies etc were available to buy," wrote Kaya.
Kaya continues: " It would give support to new parents, a source of information and advice. Most of all it would be a checkpoint that could pick up any potential abuse in the early stages. Anyone missing a visit would have someone calling out to check things were well."
But Ms Sweet from Western Springs had a word of caution and asks how the compulsory visits would be policed.
"My fear is that if that specific policy were brought in, the huge differences in cultural divides will end up dictating what is/isn't acceptable, i.e a middle class Pakeha family going on an overseas holiday may be acceptable, but what about a lower-class Maori family unexpectedly needing to attend tangi for extended family members (which is very normal and happens quite often)?
"In either case they're both perfectly legitimate reasons, but my question is who's place will it be to decide that? I would hope it's someone who understands the various intricacies in life that we can't always control," writes Ms Sweet.
Another reader calling themselves Kiwi wrote that mandatory parenting classes were needed as well as tougher consequences for abusive parents.
Logical wrote violence is cyclical. "CYFS seem to have some optimism in taking children out of abusive homes, and placing them with their grandparents. Arguably, they have been the ones who modelled the abusive parenting that is being practiced.
"There is a need to break the cycle, and that means removing the children and placing them with people who have a proven record of raising responsible and caring offspring," writes Logical.
Carolyn from Te Atatu South supports tough consequences for parents found to be under the influence of drugs.
"In conjunction, I would like to see group homes set up for these children as they do not seem to be safe in foster care either. Group homes to be closely supervised by professionals.
"There should be no second chance with reported serious child abuse the children should immediately be removed. One strike and you are out!"
Another reader calling themselves 2eight wants "Shock TV advertisements of zero tolerance".
"I reckon they should do the same thing they did with drink driving, alcohol abuse, gambling and home violence. Might be a bit harsh, but it will target all peoples, especially children who may not be aware that they are being abused, because to them, it's normal," wrote 2eight.
Readers calling themselves My View and Che criticised people who see abuse but do not report it.
My View wrote: "They are children for Christ's sake - children. Small helpless trusting people. And if you know about abuse and don't do anything, you're just as bad as the people doing it".
Che said he was disturbed that friends and family could turn a blind eye to abuse.
"One phone call is all it takes to save an innocent child."
Che also had a list of pledges:
"I will not shut my mouth, I will not blast the music to murder, I will not close the curtains to the crying of the abused, I will keep my door open to help, I will help put away anyone at anytime who is the abuser, I am the speaking voice of our precious children."
