Parents who deliberately starve children of love face jail under new government Law
Parents who deliberately starve children of love face jail under new Cinderella Law
Changes to the child neglect laws will make “emotional cruelty” a crime for the first time.
The Government will introduce the change in the Queen’s Speech in early June to enforce the protection of children’s emotional, social and behavioural well-being.
Parents found guilty under the law change could face up to 10 years in prison.
It could include deliberately ignoring a child, or not showing them any love, over prolonged periods, damaging a child’s emotional development.
Other new offences could include forcing a child to witness domestic violence, making a child a scape goat or forcing degrading punishments upon them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/10732982/Parents-who-starve-children-of-love-face-jail.html
An interesting development.
It does all sound rather dangerously subjective though and open to interpretation.
Changes to the child neglect laws will make “emotional cruelty” a crime for the first time.
The Government will introduce the change in the Queen’s Speech in early June to enforce the protection of children’s emotional, social and behavioural well-being.
Parents found guilty under the law change could face up to 10 years in prison.
It could include deliberately ignoring a child, or not showing them any love, over prolonged periods, damaging a child’s emotional development.
Other new offences could include forcing a child to witness domestic violence, making a child a scape goat or forcing degrading punishments upon them.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/children_shealth/10732982/Parents-who-starve-children-of-love-face-jail.html
An interesting development.
It does all sound rather dangerously subjective though and open to interpretation.
0
Comments
That's what Jol was saying, it's open to interpretation.
Presumably, the law will apply to teachers and nannies.
More than two million children are 'growing up cold' in England, according to new figures released today, as a poll suggests that UK parents are sacrificing buying family essentials in order to heat their homes.
The shocking figures from ACE Research for the Energy Bill Revolution show the number of children living in fuel poverty has increased by 460,000 over the past year, a dramatic 26% rise.
http://www.itv.com/news/update/2014-01-30/over-two-million-uk-children-are-growing-up-cold/
This sounds like another daft idea anyway... how on earth would they check on every child to see if they are facing emotional cruelty, and what about when alcoholism and mental illness is a driving factor? Emotional cruelty isn't always apparent to children themselves, it can be hidden and not talked about. There have been studies done that show that childrens wellbeing generally is worse in more unequal societies. That's what needs to change if we are going to seriously tackle the problem. What good is sending parents to jail for emotional cruelty going to do?
Tories lay good things to waste and push people to the edge and then blame them for everything. We need to lay them to waste before things can start to get better for people.
I wonder why you didn't paste this bit in, it was a Labour plan
while the respected Labour MP Paul Goggins, who died in January, started his campaign to amend the law in February 2013.
Nevermind the teenager years.. talk about powder kegs
Well this take the crown for the biggest load of bollox I read all day. Yet again we must protect the children!! Nanny State knows best people :D
"children of LOVE"
"CINDERELLA law"
are we now living in FANTASY LAND ..... oh wait, this is the tories we're talking about!
CHILD NEGLECT IS ALREADY A CRIME YOU MORONS
It does indeed.
Has cross party support
Not only that it's another tier of mitigating evidence for a persons actions should said actions find them up infront of the beak.
It's fair to say that mental as well as physical abuse is wrong, but as far as legislating against it goes .....
...subjective minefield at best.
who do you think knows more about the laws surrounding child neglect? you or the responsible department?
<Rollyeyes> read post 6.
Apart from the blatantly tribal BS. I agree.
:D:D:D
It's a stupid idea and entirely unworkable and a lot of nonsense.
Wrong.
The parents who are still getting away with it because the responsible department either can't touch them or hasn't got a clue what's going on?
the actual discussion involves 'emotional cruelty' had the OP chosen that phrase this thread would be entirely different.
Jol can't speak out in favour 'emotional cruelty' to children, but if he calls it starving of love and says it seems a bit unclear the thread will write itself.
it's not a lack of hugs tax as i'm sure labour would be calling it if they weren't supporting it. it's emotional cruelty. which is not currently illegal. if you wish you can tell your child you hate it every day of it's life. should that be ok?
Labour/Conservative/Lib Dem, they like laws like this particular one because no actual evidence is needed. Just an opinion.
When Labour/Conservatives are in agreement you know things are bad. It's actually quite scary where the country is going.
Not everything can be legislated away you know...
This is the sort of thinking that New Labour were guilty of, thinking you could just "fix" a problem with a new law.
I'm pretty sure you could find a huge number of child pyschologists who would consider being brought up by a nanny as emotional harm of a high level.
Will MPs with nannies be in the dock? Celebrities?
as we now recognise the equivalence of emotional well being it seems worth while updating the law. how do you know this? are you speaking in the general case or are you saying that there is no evidence a law is needed here?
no.
i'm sure when they introduced laws against child abuse there would have been people saying what does this mean we will be locking people up for this or that.
do you think it should be legal to call your child a **** every day, tell it you hate it and make it sit in silence? yes or no?
To be fair it is the Telegraphs headline, maybe you should take issue with them