Reactive Law

I came home from church today and saw this pamphlet in my mailbox.  It was a personal appeal to launch Christie's Law by Sensible Sentencing Trust after the murder of Christie last year.  Christie lives on the road parallel to the road I live in.  I remember on the morning Christie was murdered, I heard lots of sirens and didnt think much about it until I saw in the North Shore Times, the story of her murder.  Here is a link to her murder story.  http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/5940887/Family-hold-on-to-memories-of-Christie-Marceau

My reaction to this pamphlet - a good move and hopefully it can change the law but to Christie's parents, siblings and boyfriend, Christie is already dead.  No matter what we do now, the fact that Christie was murdered will not change.  

But what affected me is the way the law works.  Despite constant complains and facts indicating that there is a major flaw in the law, nothing is done or it is conveniently ignored until something happens.  But that usually mean it is too late for the people involved.  

So far only the family law has been my constant daily struggle.  I have repeatedly told lawyers over and over again, presented mental health reports, psychologists reports that putting a toddler to live out of a knapsack can have quite a significant mental effect on the child.  But all I get is:

 

1)  These research articles/facts are from the USA.  Seriously, are children in the USA different from NZ?  People have realised that the so called Best Interest of the Child is not working, that's why a research has been undertaken!

2) The LAW requires the child to live out of a knapsack so it is OK.  We cannot be unfair to either parent.  

Honestly, the Law is man made but to be treated like it is a Bible and the veto decision over a parent's opinion seem very extreme and lack of discernment in the so called justice makers.  

So what happens now?  The law changed 15 years back to remove custody and expect equal share of the child and child living out of a knapsack.  Then flashforward 10 years, these children all grown up and then there is a significant rise of mental health amongst the youth and youth suicide.  But to change the law is a long tedious process so the 'people' of power/ law makers just ignore the issue and pretend that it is unrelated.  Maybe then one day,  an outspoken psychologist comes along and make sure that his findings/views are heard.  But what does that mean to my child?  Too late.  He has already suffered the psychological and mental damage.  

Look at Christie's killer, Akshay Chand.  Only 18 and what triggered in him to murder?  His life is over, he is hated by Christie's family and friends while his family and friends feel hurt and sorry and try to put the blame on someone/something.  It's human nature to just want to blame someone or something.  Maybe blame the law?  Maybe blame the racism?  They can continue blaming and and the LAW can continue shirking responsibility but in the end it is the people affected that gets hurt.  

It is my son's future that I am fighting for.  I do not want him to be another statistic.  It's time the law makers be a bit more proactive rather than reactive.  Dont wait for something to happen, another teen murderer due to mental health, another dead teen before you go in depth and realised it is the law that enables all this to happen.  

If there is more repercussion in the law, whether it is murder or divorce, people are less likely to commit the wrongdoings.  A simple cause and effect rule that works in all aspect of life.