El agente aduanal en los siguientes casos:

Researchers have considered a variety of factors that could influence the level of impact experienced by children. Discussions about the effects of violence that children experience invariably include reference to the developmental consequences of violence (Cicchetti & Lynch; 1 993; Finkelhor & Dziuba-Leatherman, 1 994a; Finkelhor, 1 995; Perry, 2002; Wolfe et aI., 2003). Perry (2002) stated, "the earlier and more pervasive the abuse is, the more devastating the developmental problems for the child" (p. 89). The variety of reactions from children, including the nature and severity of the injuries resulting from the victimisation may vary according to children's stages of

development. In terms of the severity of the impact, Finkelhor ( 1 995) explained that negative developmental effects are likely to occur if the victimisation (1) is repetitive and ongoing; (2) dramatically changes the nature of the child' s relationship with his or her primary support system; (3) adds to other serious stressors; or (4) interrupts a crucial developmental transition (p. 1 85).

Melzak (1 997) contends that while psychological impact is the predominant reaction to acts of violation, the level of impact is determined by a number of factors. Melzak identified these factors as: ( 1 ) the child's age; (2) the extent of the violence; (3) the child's relationship with the perpetrator; (4) the long and short term meaning of the violence for the child; (5) the extent to which the violent event is connected with loss and change; and (6) whether or not the child generalises their understanding of the world from their violent experiences.

Morgan and Zedner (1 992) consider that the seriousness of the impact is more likely to be affected by the following three factors. Firstly, the circumstances of the offence, for example, betrayal of trust by a known adult will worsen the impact. Secondly, personal characteristics and experiences of the child also play a part in the impact. The impact will be more traumatic for a child with little previous exposure to violence and will also be affected by the child's level of resilience. Thirdly, Morgan and Zedner support the findings of other researchers that the age and gender of the child is important in relation to the effects of bruising and scarring, or whether they choose to disclose their victimisation (Morgan & Zedner, 1992).

Summary of the Impact of Violence on Children

There is a convergence among researchers that exposure to violence has a damaging effect on children. However, children exhibit a range of physical and emotional reactions due to a variety of factors and the severity level of the impact is also determined by a number of factors. The more that a traumatic event disrupts their normal life the more likely it is that a person will develop PTSD.

Whether it is through direct or indirect violence, victimisation in childhood and adolescence has an impact on the children who experience this, which can lead to future disorders by "etching an often indelible signature on the individual's development"

(Schwarz & Perry, 1 994, p. 3 1 1 ). Most of the research literature is based on studies undertaken to determine the cognitive, behavioural, emotional and long-term effects of violence on children. Considered together, common indicators of victimisation include: low self-esteem; withdrawal; regressive behaviour; impaired capacity to enjoy life and school learning problems (Finkelhor & Dziuba-Leatherman, 1 994b; Shore, 1 997).

Part C: Moderating Factors

What factors mitigate and reduce the impact of violent and traumatic events on children? To inform the third research question for the present study, this section reviews research studies that extend understanding of those factors. Exploration of this question requires knowledge of ( 1 ) the antecedents or demographics that may predict children's exposure to violence; (2) mitigating factors and useful responses in the aftermath of violent and traumatic events; and (3) the characteristics and cultures of schools that help to build environments able to reduce the probability of negative experiences for children.

Antecedents

There is evidence to suggest that the context of poverty (rather than ethnicity) is one of the main risk factors for violence (e.g., Slee, 2003). Although violence crosses all socioeconomic sectors, Weis, Marusza, and Fine advise (1 998) it is generally accepted that more people are affected in lower socioeconomic areas and that it can be intergenerational. Violence is linked to poverty and inequity because it occurs more

and high rates of drug abuse (Groves, 1997; Weis et aI., 1998). Slee (2003) noted a growing international concern that violence is an educational, social and political issue in that it is related to socioeconomically disadvantaged, usually urban areas, and that "the most marginalized in our society -the poor, the young, and the Indigenous ­ appear most at risk of victimisation" (p. 303).

Similarly a combination of poverty and policies are linked to violence and child abuse in New Zealand (Blaiklock, Kiro, Belgrave, Low, Davenport, & Hassell, 2002; Kelsey, 1995). One third of families with children are reported as living in poverty (Kelsey, 1995; Smith, Gollop, Taylor, & Marshall, 2004) and OECD statistics indicate that New Zealand has the fifth highest gap between the wealthiest and poorest families (Blaiklock, Kiro, Belgrave, Low, Davenport, & Hassell, 2002; UNICEF, 2005). In its second non-government organisations' report to the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, Action for Children and Youth Aotearoa (ACYA) highlighted that 3 out of 10 New Zealand children are living in poverty. ACYA (2003) takes the view that New Zealand has created an unequal society by providing discriminatory social assistance that profoundly affects the realisation of their rights for some groups of children. Consistent with this view, Fergusson (1998) reported that physical child abuse and family violence is "embedded within a broader social context that is characterised by multiple sources of social disadvantage, family dysfunction and parental adjustment difficulties" (p. 171). Fergusson's findings from the Christchurch Health and Development Study also corroborate those of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study (Pryor & Woodward, 1996) in relation to the impact of adverse environments and parenting practices on children and subsequent associations with child abuse.

Living in disadvantaged or dysfunctional families therefore increases the risk of exposure to violence. All of the risk factors associated with poverty can have an adverse impact (for example, large families, overcrowded houses, drugs, and alcohol). Harsh parenting practices can lead to further abuse. These accumulative factors all contribute to risk for children reared in such families by adding to the stressors associated with violence and abuse (Fergusson, 1998; Garbarino, 2001; Groves, 1997; Pryor & Woodward, 1996; Weiss et al., 1998).

In addition to the socioeconomic factors that place children at risk, other

demographic factors also have an influence. There is evidence to suggest that age and gender may play a role in the types of violence experienced by children. Finkelhor and Dziuba-Leatherman' s ( 1994b) examination of the literature indicated that boys are more

likely to be victims of homicide, assault and robbery, whereas girls experience more sexual violence and are at approximately double the risk of boys throughout childhood and adolescence.

For older children (adolescents) the perpetrator is usually male, and the victim is female (Lapsley, 1993), which contrasts with the abuse pattern of younger children where women are just as likely as men to be the perpetrators (Fergusson, 1998; Lapsley, 1993). Physical abuse is more commonly reported with younger children, whereas reports of sexual and psychological abuse are common with adolescent victims. Further to the earlier discussion about ethnicity, Young et al. ( 1997) found no link to ethnicity and the prevalence of sexual violence (as cited by the Ministry of Health, 1997).

Other antecedents may prevent children being placed at further risk. For example, there are a number of policies and laws already in place to support children. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC), which New Zealand ratified in 1993, is important for its power to guide practice by regulating governmental changes in policy development for the betterment of children. In June 2002, the

Ministry of Social Development launched its Agenda for Children, a government strategy aimed at improving the lives of New Zealand children (p. 6). The fourth of seven key action areas intends to address violence in children's lives, with a particular focus on reducing bullying (p. 24). A key principle of the Agendafor Children is that Government policies and services affecting children become consistent with UNCROC guidelines.

With its obligation to the United Nations Convention in mind, the New Zealand Government has introduced new child-focused legislation and the merits of old laws are currently under consideration for amendment. Towards the end of 2004, the New Zealand Parliament passed four new Family Law Acts (the Care of Children Act, the

Civil Union Act, the Human Assisted Reproductive Technology Act, and the Status of Children Amendment Act). The Care of Children Act, 2004, is most relevant to this study. Using the term "views" to coincide with the term used in Article 12 of the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child, this Act goes beyond Section 13(a) of the Children, Young Persons, and Their Families Act 1989, by prioritising the rights of children to contribute and to have their views taken into account in any decision-making process - whether they expressed those views directly or indirectly through a

A key example of an old law under investigation at this time is the 196 1 Crimes Act. Currently children in New Zealand are the only people who can be legally hit (Dobbs, 2005; Dobbs & Duncan, 2004). Section 59 of the 1961 Crimes Act allows parents to use reasonable force to discipline their children. This is contrary to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and has created a wide-ranging debate of

the use of physical punishment on children (Dobbs, Smith, & Taylor, 2006). As stated by Mason and Falloon (2001, p. 106) "physical punishment has historically been a legitimated part of unequal relationships, imposed by persons of authority on others subordinate to them" and its use on children has become a human rights issue. At the present time the New Zealand Parliament has been considering whether to repeal or amend Section 59 of the Crimes Act via the Crimes (Abolition of Force as a

Justification for Child Discipline) Amendment Bill. A leading proponent for the repeal of Section 59 stated, "Children's vulnerability and their special needs for positive guidance and control are some of the very reasons why we should reconsider subjecting them to forms of punishment that we find unacceptable with other people" (Wood,

1998, p. 55). Wood suggests "promoting the rights of children to physical integrity challenges outdated notions of children as property and therefore improves their status" ( 1998, p. 55). Clark (2001) also argues that children have a moral right to bodily

integrity and that their moral rights should take precedence over the legal right of parents to use physical punishment on their children. Supported by international research (Straus, 1994) proponents for the repeal of this legislation consider a number of child abuse cases in this country, that commonly occur when parents' physical punishment of their children goes too far, will be prevented with the repeal of Section 59 (ACYA, 2003; Smith et aI., 2004, 2005; UNICEF, 2003; Wood, 1998). Synthesis of the research literature by Smith et al. (2004, 2005) on the discipline and guidance of children points to the long-term effects and negative outcomes for children exposed to harsh physical punishment.

Mitigating Factors and Useful Responses in the Aftermath of