Miss Bartlett Expounds Views Against Bill (Press, 26 June 1982)

In a submission to the Parliamentary Select Committee hearing on the Domestic Protection Bill on 26 June 1982, Patricia Bartlett, the national secretary of the Society for Promotion of Community Standards, voiced strong opposition to the proposed legislation. She argued that the bill, which aims to address domestic violence, includes provisions for recognising de facto relationships that, if enacted, would undermine the institution of marriage and the family in New Zealand. Bartlett expressed concern that the inclusion of de facto relationships in the legislation could set a precedent that would ultimately lead to the recognition of various alternative family structures which, according to her, could deviate significantly from traditional marriage. She elaborated that the term "family" was not clearly defined in the bill, allowing for a broad interpretation that could encompass modified marriages, co-marital relationships, and even same-sex unions, among others. She feared that such a vague definition could pave the way for legal recognition of diverse marital arrangements, including polygamous or group marriages. In her presentation, Bartlett did not attribute any intentional malice to the lawmakers proposing the bill but stressed that the potential outcomes of the legislation were troubling. She argued that the legislative move towards recognising de facto relationships would lead society to accept various forms of family structures, which she considered to be detrimental. Emphasising her belief that marriage, as traditionally understood, is a cornerstone of societal stability, she warned that granting statutory recognition to de facto relationships could open the door to what she termed "abuses and affronts" to societal standards. Bartlett categorically asserted that such changes would first affect the recognition of homosexual relationships, framing this shift as an affront to the values of decent citizens. For her, the traditional institution of marriage and the family formed the foundation of the state and deserved unwavering support, rather than legislative changes that might dilute their significance. Overall, Bartlett’s submission underscored a deep concern over the changing landscape of family and marriage in New Zealand, positioning her argument within a broader cultural and moral context. Her statements attempted to rally opposition to the bill on the grounds that it threatened to erode the traditional values that she believed were essential for the well-being of society as a whole.

The text on this page is created, in the most part, using Generative AI and so may contain errors or omissions. It is supplied to you without guarantee or warranty of correctness. If you find an error or would like to make a content suggestion please get in contact

The text on this page is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 New Zealand