The sentiments are good, but I really have to question the value judgements behind the decision to ask every woman in hospital aged 16 – 65 if they have ever been beaten up, threatened or sexually abused (or repeatedly criticised!).
If they were to be standard questions for all women with any sort of injury, then that would make sense. But they are going to ask cancer sufferers, women with ingrown toenails, women having their tonsils out etc.
Why stop at hospitals? Why not employ people to visit every home in NZ every six months, to ask the same thing?
Reducing domestic violence and child abuse is a good thing. There is something wrong with those who hurt those they are meant to love. But to start questioning women about such things, when there is not even a skerrick of evidence to suggest they are being abused seems over the top. As I said, if they restricted it to those with any injury (no matter how innocent the explanation) then that would be more sensible targeting.
As an example of how this works, I presume then that if Helen Clark went into hospital to have her appendix out, she would be questioned as to whether her husband beats her up, whether he always criticises her and has she even been asked to do anything sexual she didn’t want to do.Tags: New Zealand