Keith Rankin: Cheaper better Protection Orders?

Tuesday, 28 August 2007, 10:12 am
Opinion: Keith Rankin

Cheaper better Protection Orders?

The matter of non-violence protection orders has hit the news again, but not in a way that any of the issues can be easily resolved.

The problem clearly appears to be that not all protection orders are sought for the purpose of protection. They also seem to be used so that one parent can gain leverage over the other in an anticipated dispute over the care of children. Indeed, this politicisation of protection orders would appear to be the reason why protection orders are not automatically granted.

It seems to me that there is another approach which will both save on legal bills and the time of Family Court judges, while also granting more protection to more people. Persons should be able to buy a protection order for a minimal charge, such as $10. Just go to the

Family Court and buy a protection order that gives at least as much protection as protection orders today give.

The key points to note are the following:

• A protection order would give equal protection to both parties. Thus both the respondent and the applicant would receive notice that they are in receipt of equal protection from the other.

• The purchase of a protection order would be inadmissible as evidence of violence in hearings relating to other matters such as child custody.

Thus, if domestic violence is a reason why a parent should not be granted care of or contact with his or her children, then the appropriate forum for that discussion to take place is the seeking of a parental order and not in the seeking of a protection order.

• Person's purchasing protection orders should be advised that such a step will in itself make it much harder for a reconciliation of the relationship with the other party to take place.

That is, in cases where the applicant does not wish the relationship to be permanently ended, processes such as urgent counselling may be more appropriate. One final note relating to the protection of children. Many of the worst cases of violence to children appear to be perpetrated by step-fathers.

Hence it is a matter of common sense that family law works in a way that adopts the principles of "voice" rather than the principles of "exit". (The originating work on these principles is a book called Exit, Voice and Loyalty, 1970, by political economist Albert O Hirschman. Many other academic writings in all of the social sciences, including subsequent writings by Hirschman, have built on this initial work.)

More often than not the enforced exit of natural fathers from their children's lives is followed within a year or two by the entry of a step-father with whom the children may be in greater danger and from whom the children may receive fewer emotional benefits. The granting of protection orders can be depoliticised by making them easier to access; and making them about protection and not about judgement. There are other forums through which judgement, when necessary, can be made.

Keith Rankin is a lecturer in the Unitec Business School

ENDS

© Scoop Media

Keith Rankin

Political Economist, Scoop Columnist

Keith Rankin taught economics at Unitec in Mt Albert since 1999. An economic historian by training, his research has included an analysis of labour supply in the Great Depression of the 1930s, and has included estimates of New Zealand's GNP going back to the 1850s.

Keith believes that many of the economic issues that beguile us cannot be understood by relying on the orthodox interpretations of our social science disciplines. Keith favours a critical approach that emphasises new perspectives rather than simply opposing those practices and policies that we don't like.

Keith retired in 2020 and lives with his family in Glen Eden, Auckland.

Contact Keith Rankin

• Website - Kieth Rankin