Coroner says monitor solo mothers

Some common sense coming through.

Rotorua Coroner Wallace Bain is calling for compulsory spot checks of all children from birth to the age of 5 to ensure they are safe and to avoid a repeat of the “horrific” death of toddler Nia Glassie.

The Rotorua 3-year-old died on August 3, 2007.

The coroner determined the toddler died from cerebral infarction against a background of “extreme violence”.

Dr Bain is also calling for all solo parents on a benefit to be monitored and overseen to ensure the safety of children in their care.

“We must urgently return to the “good-old-days” where every child was seen regularly by the Plunket Nurse,” he said.

Dr Bain has released his findings into Nia’s death. She died after being abused and ill-treated by members of her extended family who were looking after her while her mother worked.

About time someone stood up and challenged governments to start to do something about the appalling slaughter of the young at the hands of their “care-givers”.

Paula Bennett and National have already started the process with their changes to benefits, they should take these recommendations on board pronto.

Now queue the wailing of the left wing labeling this is as more beneficiary bashing.


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • rouppe

    Notwithstanding that what happened to Nia Glassie was appaling:

    What exactly is this going to do? Nia was abused terribly over 5 days. Is someone going to be visiting all those homes every 2 or 3 days? Would Lisa Kuka have been determined to be a solo mum given all the people living in the same house, many of whom were related?

    Or are all households with under 5’s going to be visited… This is simply unworkable nonsense. The worst type already convince doctors, nurses, corrections staff etc that everything is sweet.

    Those under 24 hour supervision manage to sneak out to commit further crimes for goodness sake.

    Sounds good, but not going to do anything.

  • Richard McGrath

    Sorry Cam, but I disagree. Hopefully this stream of consciousness thinking from the coroner will not gain traction, or we’ll see all children nationalised wards of the state, chipped like dogs, stamped, numbered, filed, indexed and debriefed.

    This statist crap is an excuse for Big Brother to know exactly what New Zealanders are doing and just where they are, from the moment they are chipped (which will happen just after their umbilical cord is severed).

    Yes, that sounds paranoid, but how will being a chip (or someone from the gummint snooping around), stop kids like Nia being clotheslined or tossed in the dryer? Chips and spies are treating the symptoms not the cause – which is a perverse welfare system that pays no hopers to breed, and encourages broken families where the solo mum’s new boyfriend or one of her extended family bashes and tortures some toddler to death.

    Just fucking pathetic. That coroner should be sacked.

  • BR

    “Some com­mon sense com­ing through”

    I disagree.

    This would be yet another example of the state poking it’s nose into things that are none of it’s business. The idea that some state bureaucrat should be able to forcibly enter one’s home for the express purpose of checking to make sure that a crime isn’t being committed is a step on the road to a police state. It would cross a boundary that should never be crossed. Ever.


    • If the state is paying for things then they should be involved and poking their nose in. The official welfare policy of payment then abandonment has worked a real treat hasn’t it?

      My world view is this: If you don’t want the state poking their nose into your life then minimise how much you receive from the state. However of you are the other way round and maximise what the state hands out to you then get used to it poking its nose in.

      Makes it real simple. Don;t want the state poking around in your life then stop letting them in by sucking from the state’s tits.

      • navyman

        I totally agree WO, functional families would be recognised as infrequently needing a visit , but the heaving underclass could ( and should ) be getting a knock on the door 2-3 times a week. FFS its my money thats paying for their weed and woody’s , when i would prefer it was spent on the kids.
        The coroner was quite correct , this country has an appalling level of abuse , and we need to stop it now

      • Andijandal

        The coroner was not stating that sole parents on the DPB should be monitored though was he?

        ‘The coroner recommends there be state intervention and monitoring of children in single parent homes where the family have previously come to the attention of authorities, where a mother works fulltime and others care for the children and where domestic or child violence has been identified.’

        Or do you think that all sole parents on the DPB (sorry, mothers only, because clearly sole fathers on the DPB are blameless) are in family situations where they have previously come to the attention of authorities, or domestic or child violence has been identified.  Clearly mothers who work fulltime are not recipients of the DPB at all.  

  • BR

    For those on taxpayer funded benefits, I don’t actually care what hoops they are made to jump through. Anything that will discourage them from being on a benefit is OK by me.

    However, the coroner was promoting the idea that this compulsory policy be extended to ALL families with young children. That is a fundamental and dangerous move towards a police state.


  • Phronesis

    Coroners really aren’t the brightest. One recently reacted to some idiot intentionally asphyxiating himself with helium by suggesting the government should regulate the sale of all gases. Muppets.

  • Cynical

    I have no problem with regular plunket visits for all young families and monitoring of lower socio-economic groups and other population groups which are clearly identified as at risk – including individual families (rich, poor or in-between) which display signs of risk.

    However I’m increasingly concerned about the ever increasing view in NZ that if something is broken we need to “regulate”. I hear that a coroner now wants to licence all boaties and register all boats. Another coroner wants cyclists to be licensed (8 year old kids??).

    I agree in part with Phronesis (although the coroners I’ve met have been exceptionally bright people) – people have accidents at home with ladders and scissors. Whats next, require us to have a licence before we can change a light bulb or cut some wrapping paper???

    About the only thing I see a need to regulate and regulate hard is booze – just look at our A&E wards. I’d wager that any inconvenience to me paying twice the current amount for booze would be far outweighed by the savings in our criminal, health and education systems achieved by standing up to the booze barons.

    Aside from booze – which requires regulation and which won’t be effectively regulated – I fear we’re turning into a nanny state like the UK. We already have the “holier than thou” PC fuckers who live in their state funded ivory towers answering any hard questions or issues by making personal allegations of racism, gender bias etc – just like McCarthy in the USA in the 50s calling anyone who challenged or questioned the status quo a “dirty commie” and then proceeding to ruin their lives – or perhaps the Isralis who call anyone who questions their international relations a Nazi sympathiser, “anti jewish” or “anti-zionist”…