Families Commission get violent on us
The Families Commission has a survey on family violence on their site the couch. The problem is that this tax payer funded survey is crap, and it is poorly designed.
The Commission asks whether various forms of family conflict is family violence, except they don't say conflict they ask whether violence is family violence. This automatically assumes that the Families Commission considers all family conflict as violent, and is a bit like asking, "Is violence committed by a bank robber on a teller during a bank raid on a crowded bank a public display of violence?"
To ask whether "violence between the following people is family violence" is a clear indication of bias in the survey approach. To ask, "is a violent action violent" is immediately telling the person filling out the person the intended outcome. Interestingly enough, the Commission refuses to ask whether people think that physical discipline in the home is violence, or whether people think that it is acceptable.
The fact that many of the questions are leading and that they are open to different interpretations over the definition of violence means that it is impossible to draw a conclusion from the survey. Consequently it is impossible for anyone to analyse the data to draw a quantitative result - the data will always have to be reinterpreted by the survey analyst with a number of presumptions over what is meant by "violence".
Why doesn't the Families Commission ask what people consider as violent? Probably for the same reason why they refuse to do a poll surveying peoples attitudes on physical discipline in the home.
3 comments:
Right on Dave. I just completed the poll myself and left a comment at the end, which I've reprinted here for your benefit:
"This questionaire is poorly worded - most of the questions are saying "do you think violence is violence". Well of course the answer will be yes or a variant of it.
Also, abolishing section 59 has nothing to do with violence, and if you construe any of my answers to support the repeal of section 59, then please remove all my answers from your survey, delete them and do not retain them in any form whatsoever (apart from my response to question 17). Retaining section 59 does not promote violence in the family; instead is provides the moral means parents have to ensure their children are brought up in a loving way so that they become adults who contribute in a mature way to society. I would recommend you add one more question to your survey: Does what the law provides in section 59 of the Crimes Act allow parents to bring up their children in a responsibile manner? Why haven't you asked that question? Why don't you reveal your bias against retaining section 59? Why won't you let the public participating in this poll make their views known for that question? I know you regard what section 59 allows as violence, so why havent you included it in your poll?
You would have done better to ask people what are the causes of violence - e.g. violent video games, TV, videos/DVD movies, abortion, lack of personal acountability, lack of personal responsibility and selfishness would be a good start but at least to your credit you have made some sort of start."
Duh!
What do you expect from an organisation with No teeth, No Autonomy from the Govt and under the sway of Helen Clark.
To support sect 59?
Support parents rights and responsibilities over the state?
To properly deal to the shonky worldviews of ethnic groups who actually allow beating of kids, wives and then hide it from police?
I voted UF but won't again, talk about wolves in sheeps clothing.
MikeNZ
Yes I do feel like a duh now.
This Families Commission should be disbanded immediately, in fact it's good news that the legislation only funded it for 4 years (from memory) with no guarantee that the funding will continue. Hopefully we can stopfunding of the Children's Commisionner office afetr that.
It's either that or some sort of wholesale change of the commisionners.
Matthew.
Post a Comment