Monday, August 13, 2007

why the Kahui's should never have been parents

Reading the reports of the Kahui court case it is quite clear what the problem was: these two were quite happy shacking up but didn't want to commit to being parents, and Chris Kahui didn't want to go out and get a job. So why was he on a benefit, if you have to be available and looking for full time work to be eligible for a benefit?

Instead the couple argued about Chris Kahui's lack of work motivation, and King felt that when she was tired she could take off to her mums, sisters, wherever else..while Chris would go around and get her - and heaven knows where the kids would be and whether the whanau even though there may be something wrong.

No responsibility for parenting,that's what. By both parents, by the grandparents, or by the rest of the whanau. And y'know, our Government doesn't even care about such responsibilities enough to say anything about it, let alone do anything about it apart from given these idiots family assistance as well as a benefit and allowing them to be bludging off the state - and they wonder why our child abuse figures are so high.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

well said.
This is exactly why our child abuse figures are so high.

What's sad about this is All of the MP's who voted for the anti smacking bill know this and knew the bill they voted for would do nothing for child abuse.

how can we expect anything to be done about this by corrupt people deviod of truth or honesty.

who is going to lead from the front from ther beehive or the national party?

No One.
So we will have more kahuis and more until it becomes too hard to go on.

As long as its someone else's kid and preferably brown, we can wring our hands and say ooh dear this has got to stop.

Where is Sue Bradfgord now.
Quiet as a mouse that's what!

I don't see her center stage with solutions, do you?
Is there something I'm not privy too?