Doped up on smack

(Question for smackheads in my readership: is "doped up" the correct terminology here?)

The, erm, thrilling countdown to the smacking referendum continues. To be honest, I'm not 100 per cent sure when it is - but then, I'm not even sure I'm on the electoral roll. (It turns out you don't have to be if you only want to vote for Strictly Come Dancing.) The Herald is spending all week on a fair and balanced look at whether the new law is working - and this is half the problem. It may seem precious of me to complain about quasi-balanced coverage, given that the rest of the time I complain about how unbalanced a lot of reporting is, but I think there is more to balance than 'this person says this, but that person says that'. That is the kind of balance that leads to demands to put intelligent design on the science curriculum alongside evolutionary theory. Perhaps when it comes to the electoral system, some kind of artificial balance in this sense is required.

But (and you knew that had to be coming) there is another problem with the Herald's coverage over the last week or so - it is almost entirely anecdotal. Here's a parent who says smacking is bad; here's a parent who says smacking is good. Here's Simon Barnett. Today I was greeted with the headline (again on the front page) "GP's grim diagnosis for parents":

An Auckland doctor says a quarter of New Zealand parents can't control their children.

Dr Robyn Theakston, a general practitioner in Three Kings, says the 2007 law banning the use of force for "correction" has made things worse by restricting parents' disciplinary choices.

A quarter of New Zealand parents! Goodness me, how did the Herald come by this statistic?

She told the Herald later that she saw many good parents, but she estimated that about a quarter of the parents she sees do not know how to control their children - far more than the number who treat their children too harshly.

Right. So that's an estimate. Based on the parents seen by one GP in Three Kings. Even better, this was all taken from a Your Views on which Dr Theakston had written. So what we have is a GP - that is, a general practitioner - who, for God's sake, frequents Your Views making a guess, albeit educated, as to how many bad parents there are. Taking anecdotes, which is what this is, is one thing; turning them into a generalised statistic is another (atrocious and lazy) thing.

"You can tell a good parent because they can calm the child. The child trusts the parent. They feel the parent is in control," she said. "Other children come in and the parents don't know what to do. The child is not used to being told what to do so they wreak havoc."

She said many parents were too insecure to say no to their children.

And this has what to do with smacking? You don't need to be a genius, or a GP, to know that there are bad parents around. Isn't the whole debate (when it's serious) around whether or not smacking is a good parenting tool? Whether smacking is a good way to control your children? The referendum isn't asking "Should parents be rubbish at it? Yes/no?" One or both of Dr Theakston or Simon Collins seems a bit confused over the whole issue.

The picture attached to the story just makes it worse.



What's the point here? That a parent smacked her children and they didn't turn into homicidal lunatics? That Jesus - that well-known fan of corporal punishment - is behind the 'No' campaign? (I'm immediately reminded of Bill Hicks's remark that, if He comes back, the last thing He will want to see is a crucifix.)

I know I keep banging on about this, but it's just another example of the New Zealand Woman's Daily - the idea that every story has to be related to a particular individual to be interesting. This could be written off as mere aesthetics - 'the point of a human interest story is to get people interested in an issue', someone might argue - if it didn't lead to the individuals becoming the story. Just look at the issue the other day with Bruce Burgess and the unemployment benefit. Maybe Dr Theakston's children will turn out fine despite smacking; I'm sure plenty of kids who aren't smacked will end up in prison. I was smacked as a kid, and I turned out... fine. But I'm not about to generalise from that to the position that it has no negative effect, just as we wouldn't generalise from the (recently deceased) world's oldest man putting his long life down to smoking.

------------------------------

Speaking of rubbish statistics, how about the article on page A2 - "Spanking has its uses, say pupils":

Nineteen years after physical punishment was banned in schools, a sampling of children suggests that while most want the ban, there is still some support for smacking as a form of discipline.

Ten out of 17 Year 7 pupils at Rangeview Intermediate in Te Atatu said they would vote no in the referendum which says: "Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?"

Six would vote yes, a higher proportion than the mere 11 per cent of parents voting yes in a Herald/DigiPoll survey last weekend, but still a minority. One student was unsure.

What the hell?

The sample is tiny and makes no pretence to be representative beyond the fact that Rangeview is ranked decile 5, in the middle of the parental income scale.

Yes, it is tiny. In fact, I wouldn't even call it a 'sample'. The whole idea behind it is so flawed in anything other than a shits-and-giggles 'let's see what a bunch of kids think' way that I can't understand why it is pretending to be anything else. What on earth does the school's decile rating have to do with obtaining a statistically significant sample? Even if it did achieve something, why would you bother when you were 'sampling' 17 people?

The sample is likely to be biased against smacking because only 17 parents out of the class of about 30 returned permission slips for their children to take part. The chances are that parents who smack heavily were less likely to give permission.

Why are you still talking about it as a sample? Surely there is no point talking about biases here; it's like claiming that a coin probably came up heads on a single flip because it was a bit rounded on one side. And that's all beside the point that we are asking children on their views of what is a complex social issue when they already have their hands full memorising all 150 pokemon. But it's a story, right? After all, children are the ones being smacked - let's find out what they think.

In tomorrow's Herald: we talk to prison inmates about whether sentences are too long.

Innocent until proven guilty

Someone's going to get a surprise when they pick up their copy of the Herald today. The front page carries the 'story' of a man measuring up the area around an ATM in Dargaville. Evidently, the man was captured on security footage almost six weeks ago and no one has any idea who he is.


I'm not sure why this is on the cover of the Herald. Firstly - what is this, Crimewatch? Secondly - what is this, Northland Crimewatch? I'll admit that it seems like an odd thing to be doing at 8 o'clock at night, but the man is not actually committing any crime. I don't know, maybe he's staging a play set at a bank and wants the set to be realistic. Maybe he's thinking of becoming a builder and wants some practice. Granted, he didn't do himself any particular favours by wearing a black-and-white striped jumper, shaving his head and growing a goatee, but that hardly seems tantamount to consenting to be on the front page of the Herald.

Anyway - and I should point out here that I have no recollection of ever being in Dargaville - how difficult can it be to track down someone who looks like a henchman for the Joker? I fear that by letting the trail get so cold the Herald have allowed this criminal mastermind to go into hiding. If I were the Northland Police, I would start checking inside volcanoes and abandoned castles at once.


EDIT: The Dargaville News (via Stuff) reports that:

[... A] bank spokesperson told the Dargaville and Districts News newspaper today the man was doing legitimate work.

"The man concerned was completing work on behalf of the bank."

Seems like a big old-fashioned misjudgement all round then. Editing the Herald apologises for implying that the man was a stereotypical criminal. (Although even if this was legitimate, he could still be carrying out other criminal activities on the side! Sleep with one eye open.)

Everything you needed to know about the Kyoto Protocol

Newly on the Herald website today: "Kyoto liability wiped out by new trees, says Govt":

Climate Change Minister Nick Smith said new data showed that New Zealand had sufficient forests to offset increases in emissions since 1990 to meet Kyoto Protocol obligations.

Well that's mighty convenient because earlier the story from Nick Smith was "Emissions target 'too expensive'". Lucky all those, erm, new trees were there then.

Economic cycles

Remember the National Cycleway? Unfortunately for John Key, quite a few people still do. That genius idea to get the economy literally rolling from Cape Reinga to Bluff has had several downsizings since the Prime Minister first drunkenly (possibly) jotted it down on a beer-soaked coaster. But evidently it's still front-page news - even when nothing at all has happened yet:

Prime Minister John Key is expected to announce today that construction will begin by summer on the first legs of his national cycleway, including a route from Lake Wakatipu to Bluff. He will announce several trails for his "patchwork quilt" of a cycleway between Kaitaia and Bluff, on which the Government will spend $50 million over three years. Details were unavailable last night, but Mr Key will announce the schemes to Local Government NZ's annual conference in Christchurch.

No details? It's quite a long article, and it's on the front page - there must be some hard facts somewhere...

Queenstown planner Mike Barnett, who researched those for Venture Southland, gave a "no comment" when asked if he expected the green light today.

Green Party tourism spokesman and cycling advocate Kevin Hague would not reveal anything other than confirming he would be in Christchurch for the announcement.

"I am sorry I am unable to comment but I look forward to commenting tomorrow," said Mr Hague, whose party has worked with the Government on the national cycleway under its memorandum of understanding with National.

Perhaps, then, the article should have been published... tomorrow. But maybe the local trusts doing the grunt work on the Cycleway will have more information?

Members of trusts working on North Island cycleways had yet to learn of any details but were looking forward to Mr Key's announcement.

[...] Trust chief Kelvin Hainsworth said it hoped ... Waipa District Council wants to ... the Brian Perry Charitable Trust is leading a group hoping to start ... Hauraki District councillor Mike Hayden said his council's delegation to Christchurch hoped to ... A Bay of Plenty group hopes to hook up with the Hauraki trail...

Helpful. Honestly, I can barely contain my anticipation.

Fighting the good fight

From the front page report on the US guilt-tripping New Zealand into sending more troops we don't have to Afghanistan:

The Herald travelled to Afghanistan this month, when the United States openly asked for more troops, more police trainers, more civilian expertise and more aid money.

One has to admire the Herald's boldness, but I fear that the United States will be less than delighted with our latest contribution.

Casual Friday

Seeing I wrote quite a bit yesterday, I figured I might actually do some work today. I know - what a square. But I did think I would just point out that earlier this morning EtH passed 50,000 unique views since I started writing it in January. So congratulations to me.

Before I go and pass out with joy, a quick roundup of the highlights on the Herald website [insert joke here]:

Juxtaposition of the day:

"Rape complainants' sexual pasts to be kept secret."

"No shit" headline of the day: "Sophie's killer will be target in jail: expert". Thank god the Herald contacted an expert to ascertain whether the 'most hated person in New Zealand' - a man who brutally murdered a young woman and who has, shall we say, an air of intellectual arrogance - will have a troubled time in prison. Don't drop the soap, Clayton.


Your Views of the day:

Antonius Block (Auckland): It's like Huxley's 'Brave New World' with this forced medication. So pregnant mothers 'may' benefit from folic acid; let them take it. It's the same with the flouridation of water [ flourisde being a by-produc of the aluminium industry & one which has been used in the past to passify whole populations ] - the claim that it prevents cavities is totally unfounded, whereas its correlation to brain-damage & cancer is scientifically proven. I guess, I'll not be eating so much bread from now on, then. I don't know - socialists & their totalitarian social engineering.

Scientifically proven by some of the world's top scienticians. I love how his conclusion is that he will in fact not be eating bread after all; after all, it's the thought that counts!

Silver Fox (East Tamaki) No. As a Male I have no intention or prospect of becoming pregnant at any time soon or in the future.

Oh, Silver Fox - no wonder you're so popular with the ladies.

Charles (Devonport): No. It is not the duty of bakers to medicate.

And it's not the duty of doctors to bake - but wouldn't it be nice if your GP offered you a muffin fresh out of the oven when you went in for a checkup?

Party on, Garth

The new, contemplative Garth

I've been rather bemused from the sidelines by the debate over the mandatory addition of folic acid to bread. From what I've seen, only about ten per cent of the debate has actually been about the health issue: will the proposed addition significantly and efficiently help New Zealand's public health? The remaining ninety per cent has been along the lines of "Goddamn Nanny State, get out of my bread!"

Garth George, seemingly revitalised by a winter hibernation, has emerged to congratulate the government on its brave, bold decision to... postpone implementation until further research can be done. What that means, of course, is to postpone implementation until no one remembers what folate is or what all the fuss was about.

The Government's decision to put the kibosh on the plan to add folic acid to bread was a no-brainer.

The very idea of subjecting the entire population to this chemical on the off-chance it might prevent disease in 70-odd babies in any year was always utterly incomprehensible.

Hmmm:

• By "disease", Garth means massively debilitating or fatal conditions such as spina bifida and anencephaly.
  
• By "off-chance", Garth means actually a very good chance - a study in Canada showed that the mandatory fortification of bread with folic acid coincided with a 46% drop in neural tube defects.
• By "chemical", he means folic acid, also known as folate, also known as vitamin B9. Folic acid is the exact same "chemical" that naturally occurs in plants such as... wheat.
• By "70-odd babies", he means the 70-odd children that are born horribly deformed AND the potentially many more who are aborted every year once the condition is spotted on an ultrasound. Wait, isn't Garth against abortion? Turn out he hates Nanny State more.

Sigh. Where were we?

Particularly since there was absolutely no evidence that the folated bread would be eaten by those for whom it was intended - women about to become pregnant and in the first stages of pregnancy.

We are told that, in order for the folic acid to have the desired effect, such women would have to eat 11 slices of such bread every day.

For one thing, how many women know in advance they're going to get pregnant, even if they're determinedly trying; and for another how many know they are pregnant until they miss one, or possibly two, periods?

Why would we think that potential mothers would eat bread? Because it's bread, not fois gras. The whole point of the mandatory programme was that people wouldn't have to think about potential pregnancy, folate intake or even anything beyond 'Mmmm, sandwich...' As for the "11 slices of bread" myth - as someone pointed out in the letters today, that would be total amount needed if people ate only bread. Most of us, however, like a wee lettuce leaf or some such to supplement our crust.

You can see where this dumb idea came from. Imagine a group of "experts" sitting round discussing health matters when one of them says, "Why don't we ... ?" And the rest, without benefit of thought or scientific evaluation, reply, "Oh, what a good idea. Let's do it."

Living in the airy-fairy world of academic theory, they give no thought to the people on whom their weird and wonderful ideas are to be visited. Nor would they recognise that this sort of thing is nanny statism taken to its most sinister extremes.

Ha! You got them! Imagine a group of "experts" sitting around thinking they knew more about human physiology and chemistry than your average white middle-class New Zealander! Next you'll be telling me that the chief justice knows more about the legal and penal systems than some guy at the pub.

Now don't get me wrong. Spina bifida and other neural tube defects are horrifying, and the children who suffer from them and their parents deserve our deepest sympathy and unlimited support.

But the shotgun approach of putting folic acid in the bread eaten by the entire population would do nothing to alter the fact that a handful of children are going to be born each year with such disability.

Well, except for reducing that handful by (potentially) about 46 per cent. I'm sure your words of wisdom will be very comforting to those parents who have to deal with these conditions every day - or who have to go through the heartwrenching decision to abort. Such a sympathetic figure, aren't you? "Ain't nobody gon' put vitamins in my bread just to save the lives of a few dozen children a year!"

It makes you wonder what the so-called experts in various "disciplines" will get up to next. If we accept the practice of self-medicating the community to ward off all manner of specific health conditions, where would it end?

Would the liquor industry be required to put saltpetre in all alcoholic beverages to prevent rape? Will we have methadone in our milk to help ease the withdrawal of crack addicts? Perhaps Ritalin in the butter to help to improve the concentration of poor drivers? And maybe amphetamines in the fizzy drinks to help fight obesity? The possibilities are endless.

Yes Garth, the ridiculous, straw-man possibilities are endless. How about cyanide in our central North Island meat pies to stop unresearched and bigoted rubbish appearing in our newspapers? Methadone, of course, is used to relieve addiction to opioids and, hence, does not work for crack cocaine - but I can hardly expect Garth to have gone to the trouble of googling that. I won't bother to go to the trouble of explaining the disanalogy between folate, a compound that occurs naturally in all sorts of plants we eat every day, and drugs designed in a lab to modify human physiology, like amphetamines. Oh, I just did. That was easy.

But at least Garth is taking the issue seriously, right? I mean, he's not taking the piss out of families, communities and health workers struggling with the consequences of neural tube defects...

As I said, the folic acid in bread idea originated in Australia. Perhaps, next, they'll insist that steroids and beta blockers be added to Victoria Bitter ale to prevent the struggling (oh joy!) Australian cricket team losing the Ashes.