Parents wanting to prepare their children for the modern world need to let their kids get out and explore it — sometimes without them.

That is the message visiting psychologist and TED talker Kathryn Berkett shared with Taranaki parents and teachers at her latest public talk this month.

Parents were conscientious around their kids' physical safety, but needed to be more aware of the dangers that lurk online, the Wellington-based psychologist said.

Developing resilience

Allowing your kids to go to the neighbourhood park, walk to school on their own and play outside uninterrupted were simple ways to increase resilience, she said.

"Resilience is only grown through experiencing tolerable stress.

"Which means kids need to tolerably lose, they need to get teased and experience the frustration of not getting a certificate."

Berkett spoke at a Raising Resilient Children evening for New Plymouth parents at Mangorei School last week, and held sessions with teachers from the region.

It goes against parents natural instincts to allow their children to experience hurts and disappointments, but kids need these experiences to cope as they grow, she said.

"It hurts us, but our kids are not being resilient," Berkett said. "They're getting angry, anxious and frustrated because they can't regulate their emotions.

"We're seeing a significant increase in our inability to regulate our emotions."

Berkett has a TEDx talk, The Neuroscience of Device Zombies, which delves into the effects of a device on the developing brain, the dopamine hits — and the stresses.

The brain's reward centre lights up from using devices and social media, but is negatively impacted through sudden and ongoing high levels of stress.

She referred to American social psychologist and author Jonathan Haidt who linked increases in anxiety to excessive social media use in kids and teenagers.

"Social media and device use activates the stress response but it happens way bigger and way faster," Berkett said. "You're not having the normal increase in stress."

Her antidote: "Get them off the phone."

Kids learn from making mistakes and they need to be able to do this in a controlled and supported way, Berkett said. Read more

• Michelle Robinson is a Columnist at Taranaki Daily News.

Father Kyle Ingels of the Diocese of Colorado Springs was asked about how best to answer tough questions. He recommends focusing on reviewing the basics with children before diving into their questions about deeper topics

Adults, he says, must intentionally continue learning about the faith so that they can help the children in their lives learn. Read some of the serious questions and some funny ones

The report, Nga Tukunga Iho - The Things We Inherit, offers an annual assessment of the country's social progress - this year especially -

• children and youth
• housing
• crime and punishment
• social hazards
• work and incomes

Lt-Colonel Ian Hutson, The Salvation Army's Social Policy and Parliamentary Unit director, notes the new government has inherited a mix of successes and obstacles from its predecessor.

He emphasises the impact current policies will have on future generations and the responsibility to foster a better living environment for all New Zealanders.

While the report acknowledges significant progress has been made in recent years - reductions in child poverty, an increase in social housing units, sustained low unemployment - it also points to worrying trends.

These trends include the deepening cost-of-living crisis hitting lower-income households hardest. Rising rental costs are outpacing inflation and there are overall increases in food insecurity and financial hardship.

The State of the Nation report is unequivocal in its call for the new Government to take decisive action.

Hutson stresses the need to build upon the progress achieved and to adopt successful strategies to navigate the challenges ahead.

Concerns for Maori wellbeing

One of the report's key findings pertains to Maori wellbeing.

Persistent inequities affecting Maori in education, housing, employment and the criminal justice system need to be addressed, it says.

To achieve this, the report advocates for the importance of resourcing kaupapa Maori approaches to enhance well-being for whanau, hapu and iwi.

Children and Youth

The report's Children and Youth section has both positive and negative news.

On the plus side, it rates child poverty reduction as a significant achievement.

However, it also notes poverty's disproportionate impact on Pasifika, Maori, and children living with disabilities. It stresses the need for targeted efforts to meet Government poverty reduction targets.

The report also states that young people continue to tell of high levels of mental distress.

Housing

The report's Housing section paints a grim picture of unaffordability and homelessness. This is exacerbated by a decline in new housing consents and a surge in inward migration, it says.

The report calls for an urgent increase in public housing supply to address the growing backlog.

Crime and Punishment

In terms of Crime and Punishment, the report indicates an overall increase in reported and unreported crime and notes that violent offences are increasing.

Enhancing access to housing, employment, education and social services would be more effective in reducing crime than implementing harsher punishments, the report suggests.

Social Hazards

The Social Hazards section notes a positive decline in alcohol and drug consumption.

At the same time, it points to rising gambling losses and signs of increased financial hardship. One such indicator is the increasing number of calls for early KiwiSaver withdrawals on the grounds of financial hardship.

Work and Incomes

Under the heading Work and Incomes, the Salvation Army State of the Nation report highlights the continued high levels of employment but raises concerns about the rising unemployment and the persistent wage inequality affecting women and ethnic minorities.

It says high inflation is putting pressure particularly on low-income households. Furthermore, food insecurity for households with children has increased.

Source

• Supplied: The Salvation Army
• The full report is available from the Salvation Army.

Pope Francis' main purpose in visiting Mongolia was to visit its tiny Catholic community. He completed his trip with a stop to tour and inaugurate the House of Mercy.

The House of Mercy provides health care to the most needy in the Mongolian capital and the homeless, victims of domestic abuse and migrants.

During his visit to the House, Francis blessed the sign of the charitable institution, which was established to assist women and girls in escaping domestic violence.

The House also has temporary lodging for migrants and others in need and a basic medical clinic for the homeless.

In visiting the House, Francis said he wanted to dispel "the myth" that the aim of Catholic institutions was to convert people to the religion "as if caring for others were a way of enticing people to 'join up'."

Inaugurating the church-run facility, Francis stressed that such initiatives aren't aimed at winning converts.

They are simply exercises in Christian charity, he said.

He went on to urge Mongolians rich and poor to volunteer to help their fellow citizens.

"The true progress of a nation is not gauged by economic wealth, much less by investment in the illusory power of armaments, but by its ability to provide for the health, education and integral development of its people," Francis said at the House.

The local church opened the House as an expression of the three-decade-deep roots the Catholic Church put down during its official presence in Mongolia.

However, his visit took on international connotations because of his overtures to neighbouring China about freedom of religion.

At the end of a Mass on Sunday, Francis sent greetings to China. He called its citizens a "noble" people and asked Catholics in China to be "good Christians and good citizens."

Several foreign-staffed Catholic religious orders in Mongolia run shelters, orphanages and nursing homes.

In these, they care for a population of 3.3 million where one in three people lives in poverty.

Source

• Reuters
• AP News

I can give you chapter and verse of shouting, harassment of all kinds, extreme bullying; and all done with a smile and "she'll be right, mate".

These people saw themselves as the centre of the universe.

Then nearly six years ago, two academics - Sander Thomaes and Eddie Brummelman - foretold the future.

"When we think of narcissists, we typically think of adults, whose personalities are rather crystallised - perhaps a charming but manipulative ex-partner, or a self-absorbed and authoritarian boss.

"We do not typically think of children, whose personalities are still in flux."

Here's the killer from these two: "Narcissists do not just begin to love themselves at their 18th birthday; they typically develop narcissistic traits from childhood onward."

Now the kids are behaving badly.

They monster their primary teachers, they badger their high school teachers and, by the time they get to university, they argue the toss about every single grade, they whine about group work and they want extensions because they don't wish to be inconvenienced (although, let me say, there are also those who get extensions for real reasons).

I'll defend active parenting and standing up for your children when they can't stand up for themselves - but there are limits.

Here are mine.

Your child should not be abusing a parent who comes in to help with reading groups. Your child does not need your advocacy to get them into the top sports team at school.

And your child, kill me, does not need you to call their university tutor to argue a mark on an assignment.

It was a wonderful moment in my life when I was able to tell such a parent (I'm pretending here it was a single occasion; it wasn't) that I couldn't discuss her child's university progress with her for privacy reasons.

And, no, it made no difference (at least to me) that the mother was paying the university fees.

I used the same answer when explaining to another mother that she needed to talk to her own child about whether he had actually submitted all his work.

He hadn't, no matter what he told his doting ma.

As Brummelman and co-wrote in 2015 in a study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: "We demonstrate that narcissism in children is cultivated by parental overvaluation."

They found narcissism levels are increasing among Western youth and contribute to aggression and violence. Yes, there is a direct line between the kind of parenting we do and the kind of children we rear.

A fill-in teacher has admitted his actions were "shameful" after he punched a student during an out-of-control brawl at a NSW school.

Let's be clear. We all want to stick up for our kids. We have our own ideas about what's right and what's wrong.

And I've certainly been to see the class teacher and even the principal when things went badly wrong. I've been to meetings where my own (ever so slightly imperfect) children's behaviour was called into question.

I am no angel, neither was their father and I guess it's genetic. But this constant indulging - even protectiveness - of entitled behaviour has to stop. Your child is not always right.

It's not just rudeness or a lack of cooperation or even respect.

It extends all the way to violence. We have record levels of assaults at schools and violence both within and outside school - and believe me, it is not only the behaviour of students with significant trauma in their lives for whom we must make both excuses and support mechanisms.

We know now that private schools have their own - significant - issues around assault and violence. Read more

• Jenna Price is a visiting fellow at the Australian National University and a regular columnist for The Sydney Morning Herald.

French Jews and Muslims, he pointed out, are a lot more public about demonstrating their religious identity.

But if you ask a Catholic about their affiliation, he said, you're likely to get a more evasive response like this:

"So... it's a bit complicated. How should I say it? Umm... Mum's a Catholic. Sis is an atheist... And Dad.. Dad, where are you on this?"

Religious indifference

That skit humorously illustrates the crisis Catholics face in transmitting their faith.

It is further supported by a study that the National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (INSEE) published in March, which showed that the Catholic population in France continues to fall.

While Catholics represented 29% of the people aged 18 to 59 who were polled in 2020, that is a significant drop from the 43% of the same age group polled ten years ago.

The authors say the decline is due to the low rate of handing down the Catholic faith from one generation to the next.

While the family transmission is strong in Islam and Judaism - 91% of those raised in Muslim families and 84% in Jewish families continue to claim their parents' religion - Christian families are less likely to pass their beliefs on to their children.

Only 67% of those raised by Catholic parents kept their religion.

Regular religious practice - prayer, pilgrimages, Mass attendance - appears to be a key element for passing down the faith.

"If nothing has been done in families to pass on the value of religious practice, particularly going to Mass, within three generations practicing Catholics will produce non-practicing children who will, in turn, have non-Christian children," observes Yann Raison du Cleuziou, a sociologist who studies trends in Catholicism.

Families that actively pass on their faith

Leaving the Church is all the simpler because, unlike Islam or Judaism, Catholicism has a minimal influence on social life.

"Dropping out of religion then occurs undramatically, almost in indifference, when children leave their parents' home," says Pierre Bréchon, professor emeritus of political science at Sciences Po Grenoble.

But the researcher, who conducted a study on the values of the French, observes an effective transmission of faith "in families that adopt a form of impermeability with regard to other surrounding cultures".

These practicing and rather conservative Catholic families successfully manage to pass on the faith by carefully selecting the religious socialisation of their children (through Catholic schools, youth movements, friendship circles, and so on).

Is this the winning formula?

Raison du Cleuziou says the successful transmission of the faith from one generation to the next is actually the result of the combination of two dimensions: the valuing of rituals and the "totalising" dimension of the faith that a child receives and that permeates all aspects of his or her life.

On the other hand, "Catholic families who delegate the transmission of the faith structures (catechism class, youth group, etc.) - as an aspect of education - have a much lower rate of religious transmission".

Becoming a minority religion could actually help

In fact, La Croix spoke to a number of Catholics with adult children in their thirties who admitted, with regret, that they did not succeed in passing on their faith.

Some questioned whether it was a good idea "to let children decide whether or not to be interested in religion once they become adults".

"We haven't given them enough for them to make an informed choice," said one of them.

"To reject the religion of one's parents, one must still have received it," noted this person, who is involved in catechesis at the national level.

The figures leave little room for doubt: only 2% of adults who grew up in a non-practicing Catholic family experienced a religious conversion as adults.

The fact that Catholicism is becoming a minority religion in France could paradoxically change the situation.

"When it is in the minority, a religion tends to restructure itself in order not to disappear. This reconfiguration leads to an intensification of the 'entre-soi' around significant practices," notes the sociologist Raison du Cleuziou.

But in matters of religion, the law of large numbers always coexists with the mystery of intimate experiences.

Transmission often remains an enigma even for those who have placed faith at the heart of their family life.

Catherine, the mother of seven children, describes her experience.

"The first four have a deep faith and the last three can take or leave religion," says this stay-at-home mom from Dijon.

"I don't know why some of them believe and the others don't, because we didn't do anything differently."

"Lack of authenticity"

But she points out two things that seem essential to her.

The first is having a family prayer after supper.

"To be honest, there were no great mystical flights of fancy during these prayer times, but they had the merit of being there," Catherine says.

"Looking back, I realise that we were able to cultivate gratitude as a family for all that's beautiful and good."

The second key point is the importance of taking ownership.

For this to happen, she says, the ritual must be able to open up to the message of love inscribed in the Catholic faith and find its way to the heart.

The figure of the parent, a transmitter of faith but also a figure of authority, can be ambivalent.

"There can be difficulties in the parent-child relationship that prevent passing on the faith if the relationship with the parents is conflicted, or if the children think they see a lack of authenticity in us," says Frédéric, a 67-year-old retired stock trader.

Only two of his children now feel close enough to the Church to talk to their children about Jesus.

"I think the first two were lucky enough to meet Catholics around them who really lived a relationship with Christ, while the last two were more subjected to Catholic education as a place of social replication for economic success," he says.

This example shows that the destiny of a religion certainly depends on its logic of social transmission but also on the personal experience of coherence and authentically following the Gospel.

• Héloïse de Neuville
• First published in La-Croix International. Republished with permission.

The closure comes in response to an ongoing review led by senior paediatrician Dr Hilary Cass, who warned the gender clinic was 'not a safe or viable long-term option'.

Trans-medicine is not safe for children, says the Cass Review.

There are concerns about the 'scarce and inconclusive evidence to support clinical decision-making'.

"Staff should maintain a broad clinical perspective in order to embed the care of children and young people with gender uncertainty within a broader child and adolescent health context," said Cass.

The NHS received a damning report 10 days ago.

The Tavistock Gender Clinic will be replaced by regional centres at existing children's hospitals. They will provide more holistic care with 'strong links to mental health services.

Its closure comes after a huge rise in referrals; with more than 5,000 referrals made in the last year, compared to just a few hundred 10 years ago.

Children will not be pushed toward transitioning. Instead, their mental and emotional issues will be more thoroughly explored.

The UK is not the only country questioning gender-transitioning children at present.

Other countries are seriously reconsidering the rubber-stamping of a gender-dysphoric child's belief and the prescribing of puberty-blocking drugs.

Sweden, Finland and France are all pulling back from the rush to transition gender-dysphoric children.

France acknowledges part of the issue causing concern has been the exponential increase in cases.

Concerns about the sharp rise in referrals to the Gender Identity Development Service (GIDS) are also bubbling.

In the UK, for example, there were more than 5,000 referrals last year. There were just a few hundred 10 years ago.

Transition ideologues were also accused of pushing autistic children to transition in the UK.

The lack of knowledge about the impact that puberty-blocking has on maturing bodies is a big concern.

Some child specialists think the drugs used need re-evaluating.

The Cass report makes clear that they are entirely experimental.

The impact of puberty-blockers on children had not been studied with sufficient scientific rigour, it says.

More research into the effects of puberty blockers on a young person's brain development is needed.

Questions that need answering include:

• Does the medication "pause" puberty or serve as "an initial part of a transition pathway"?
• Was brain development "temporarily or permanently disrupted by puberty blockers?"

A concern is that adolescent sex hormone surges may trigger the opening of a critical period for the experience-dependent rewiring of neural circuits underlying executive function (i.e. maturation of the part of the brain concerned with planning, decision making and judgement).

"If this is the case, brain maturation may be temporarily or permanently disrupted by puberty blockers, which could have a significant impact on the ability to make complex risk-laden decisions, as well as possible longer-term neuropsychological consequences," says Cass.

"To date, there has been very limited research on the short, medium or longer term impact of puberty blockers on neurocognitive development."

Some former patients are now questioning their access to the trans-medicine drugs.

In fact, Tavistock patient Keira Bell (pictured) took the clinic to the High Court. She said she had not been challenged enough when she was prescribed the drugs at age 16.

Source

• National Review
• Daily Mail
• National Catholic Register

The measure was associated with ‘higher language ability, cognition and social-emotional competence' once the child reached its first birthday.

The study, which drew on data from the highly regarded Growing Up in New Zealand longitudinal child development study, recommended gifting books directly to infants as a way to promote early reading. Continue reading

Maybe we attended prayer vigils with our families in grade school or high school, or maybe we just read news magazines and argued with kids on the school bus.

Either way, the questions surrounding abortion opened our minds to some fundamental moral questions.

What do people owe to one another?

What is a human life, and what is it worth?

When must we set aside our personal goals for the sake of something bigger?

I can still remember sitting in seventh-grade Spanish class, turning over the phrases in my head: "right to life," "unique human being," "woman's right to choose."

Even as it shaped our moral sensibilities, the pro-life movement also served for many of us as a kind of primer for politics in the United States.

We may have come of age with deep antagonism toward the American judiciary, but at the same time, we also had serious reasons to reflect on the value of civic peace.

We reflected on the ethical and pragmatic reasons for pursuing worthy goals within the constraints of our political system.

We talked a lot in the 90s and 2000s about "the culture of death," and also debated what might be involved in building a culture of life.

For many years now, the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade has unified pro-life Americans.

We had our disagreements, but in a strange way, our shared opposition to this Supreme Court verdict provided the canopy for a very large political tent.

But the recent leak to Politico of a draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito suggests that the Supreme Court will soon strike down Roe v. Wade, and a corner may finally be turned. We must consider the road ahead.

It is a strange moment.

The recent leak to Politico of a draft majority opinion written by Justice Samuel Alito suggests that the Supreme Court will soon strike down Roe v. Wade.

We must consider the road ahead.

If Roe is overturned, pro-life Catholics likely will rejoice, but we also must consider the ways in which the political landscape more broadly, as well as the dynamics among the various factions of the pro-life movement, may change as a result.

It may feel harder to work together in pursuit of honourable goals.

Nevertheless, we can.

It is possible because the groundwork has already been laid.

Across all those years of praying for the right judges, we understood that originalist legal theories could not really do all the work.

Strong legal protections for the unborn would be impossible without the support of a given state's voters.

Even with amenable voters, laws can only do so much. The state can and should provide some protections for unborn children, but a culture of life must go further. Children have enormous needs that cannot be met by laws. They need families. Most especially, they need parents.

The Face of Motherhood

The first eyes to meet a newborn's gaze should normally be those of the infant's mother.

She is the person whose voice a child has heard for months on end.

Her body was the child's original home.

Sometimes there are serious reasons why a mother cannot nurture her child, but in a culture of life, we would normally expect those eyes to be there, searching the tiny face, making first contact with the world's newest citizen.

No law can make this happen, but it needs to happen, at least in most cases, if we truly want to protect and support our children.

What this means, of course, is that a pro-life society must support mothers.

They are indispensable to the good of children, and to society as a whole.

What does this mean on a cultural level?

This is a terribly difficult question, not least because it plunges us into broader controversies about the status of women generally.

Historically, many or most societies have presumed that a woman's primary responsibilities were to her household and children.

Her civicstatus was generally mediated through her husband, her father or another familial male.

Children have enormous needs that cannot be met by laws.

As a somewhat natural but unfortunate extension of this principle, most societies have treated women as something less than full-fledged citizens.

In many places, until recently they were a protected class, with only some of the rights and duties that define citizens.

In the United States today, we consider that sort of arrangement to be unacceptable.

Women do deserve to be citizens, with full access to civic society.

As a woman, I am grateful that we have taken this laudable step, affirming the full dignity of women.

Still, it remains undeniably difficult today to give women the moral and material support they need to be present for their children while also ensuring the opportunity to pursue outside work (whether out of desire or necessity) or other personal interests.

Particularly on the political right, some of the proffered solutions are fairly insulting to mothers.

It is rare for these to reach the caricatured extremes of the recent book by Stephanie Gordon, Ask Your Husband, which posits that women should do little without following the instruction of the book's title.

But many people still seem to want women to diminish themselves pre-emptively, either personally or professionally, cutting out any personal interests or pursuits as if that could prove to the world that they are ready and available for mothering.

Another approach, often favoured by pro-life Catholics, calls for a greatly enhanced social safety net.

It posits that a strong safety net allows expectant mothers to feel confident that they can raise their children without experiencing dire poverty.

Thus, they may be less likely to seek abortions.

The situation would be still better if women could count on extended families and communities to offer practical help, regardless of the availability of the child's father.

Instead of scolding or punishing women for becoming pregnant (possibly under difficult circumstances), they argue, we should embrace the mother and child together, ensuring that they have what they need to thrive.

There is much to admire in this position.

It replaces harsh judgment with gentle compassion.

It recognizes that mothers both need and deserve material support, especially through pregnancy and their children's early years.

It is shocking and shameful to read stories of mothers in the United States who deliver their babies and head out within 48 hours to deliver pizzas or drive Ubers, just to keep food on their family's table.

As a society, we need to find better ways to support families, especially those raising children under adverse circumstances.

As a society, we need to find better ways to support families, especially those raising children under adverse circumstances.

Realistically, though, we must recognize that this strategy has its limits.

We cannot buy good mothers because maternity has moral and spiritual dimensions that no social program can reach.

Across the decades, pro-lifers have battled Roe v. Wade here in the United States with remarkable tenacity and conviction.

Meanwhile, in the world as a whole, abortion has become far more available, while birth rates have plummeted.

We need to face the glaring reality that motherhood is extremely difficult, with or without a network of support.

Social safety nets have their place, but if we treat them as a reliable solution to the problem of abortion, we risk repeating a mistake that already undermines a culture of life: We risk making mothers invisible.

Invisible Mothers

Invisible mothers are not a uniquely modern problem.

This became increasingly clear to me over the years as I reflected on my maternity.

I was raised on Bible stories, and I noticed from an early age that the Bible richly affirmed the value of children.

In the early years of my marriage, my husband and I struggled with infertility, and I was grateful for the many stories about remarkable biblical women who experienced similar trials.

I am now the mother of 5 children, and as my family grew, I was somewhat discomfited to notice that, although numerous descendants are promised to some as a reward for their faith, the Bible offers surprisingly few examples of mothers nurturing large families. Continue reading

According to Save the Children, hundreds of boys and teenagers were allegedly used as human shields during the fighting.

In late January, Islamic State militants attacked the Kurdish-run Gweiran prison in north-eastern Syria.

The militants used car bombs to breach the gates of the prison, releasing hundreds of prisoners. They allegedly then holed up in childrens' dormitories to slow the counter-attack from Kurdish-led forces.

It is still unclear how many children were killed during the siege and where survivors have been relocated to.

This latest battle is another sign Western countries, must do more to ensure the safety of foreign nationals trapped in Syria.

Children trapped in Syria

Like many prisons in Syria, Gweiran houses children as well as hardened militants. It is estimated about 700 children are detained there, 150 of whom are Western nationals, including at least one Australian.

Overall, there are about 7,830 foreign children living in squalid conditions in prisons and camps in Syria. The children were either taken to Syria by their parents, or were born in the camps.

Most of them are under the age of 12 and are being detained due to the alleged crimes of their parents.

From camps to prisons

Following the collapse of the caliphate in 2019, Islamic State fighters and their families were rounded up by Kurdish forces. The men were sent to prisons, and their wives and children sent to displacement camps.

Boys remain in camps until they are about 12 years old, at which point they are sent to an adult prison that also houses hardened Islamic jihadists, whether they have committed a crime or not.

International legal experts describe the conditions in detention as akin to torture. Detention is arbitrary and indefinite, and has been likened to "Europe's Guantanamo".

What options do these children have?

Children held in the displacement camps have some hope of repatriation, depending on their nationality.

To date, Australia has repatriated eight orphaned children, with 47 children still left in the camps. Western European states have opted to repatriate children under 12 on a case-by-case basis.

However, the boys held in adult prisons have few options. In particular, Western governments have been reluctant to repatriate male children over the age of ten due to concerns they have received military training, been radicalised and could pose a risk to society.

As for the adults, the Australian government has revoked the citizenship of dual nationals who chose to travel to Syria.

In terms of further assistance to young people and children in Syria, the government argues it was their parents' decision to destroy these children's lives by taking them to Syria, and Australia will not risk its personnel to rescue them.

As Foreign Minister Marise Payne recently commented:

Australia does not have diplomatic representation in Syria, and we have been very clear about the challenges of Australian citizens who have found themselves in that part of the world, having either gone there or being the children of parents who chose to go there […].

What should the international community do?

Both Kurdish authorities and the United States government have called on Western governments to repatriate all their citizens immediately.

Kurdish forces cannot guarantee the security of the camps and prisons, and do not have the capacity to hold detainees indefinitely.

Counter-terrorism experts similarly say repatriation is the safest long-term solution. This is not without risk, but Western societies have the capacity to monitor these people, assist with de-radicalisation and provide the support needed to rehabilitate adult fighters and traumatised children.

If necessary, adult returnees can also be prosecuted for their crimes and dealt with through the judicial system.

A moral issue

Repatriation is not just a national security issue, it is also a moral one - particularly in regard to children. Leaving children in prisons and camps makes them highly vulnerable. Along with numerous health and safety risks they can also be recruited by the Islamic State.

Many of these children are innocent victims, and all have rights under international law.

This includes the right to nationality, the right to life, survival and development, the right to be treated with humanity, and the right to be protected against unlawful or arbitrary deprivation of liberty. Even if older children are suspected of being radicalised or having committed crimes, Australia still has an obligation to repatriate them and apply due process.

Islamic State has a history of using jail breaks to free prisoners to add to their numbers. This latest attack shows it intends to repeat this strategy.

The international community has a choice: either repatriate and rehabilitate their citizens, or leave them in hopeless conditions and risk them refilling the ranks of the Islamic State.

• Beth Morrison Doctoral Research Candidate, The University of Queensland and Shannon Zimmerman is a Post Doctoral Research Fellow, RMIT University
• First published in The Conversation. Republished with permission.

The study, based on research carried out in the UK, United States, Brazil, and Canada in June, suggests that children felt marginalised by online worship and that parents felt that they were treated as "conduits" to pass on resources to their children instead of being offered support to nurture their children's faith.

Despite the diversity of churches in the four countries, researchers found the same challenges and issues reported during the pandemic.

The study, Do We Need a New Plan for Children's Ministry?, published at the end of last month, was written by a team of researchers from the four countries, including academics and theologians. They drew on an online survey of the views and experiences of 139 church leaders, 16 schools, and 113 Christian parents during the pandemic, as well as country-specific surveys and detailed interviews.

Children's ministry was affected particularly badly by the restrictions imposed as result of the pandemic, they discovered.

The study says: "The scale of the situation was captured by the Canadian research, revealing that 63% of churches cancelled or suspended Sunday School, 43% of churches cancelled or suspended midweek clubs and Vacation Bible Schools, and 35% cancelled or suspended camps."

The shift to online provision for children and young people did not work for many families, researchers found.

Two-thirds of those surveyed said that they felt disappointed or frustrated by the online provision, which often replicated what might have been provided in church, without allowing for a different setting at home.

"Comments illuminating this included: ‘I had to remind them to remember the children,' ‘it was easier to connect with parents than children,' ‘they did not take children seriously,' ‘the kids were left behind,' and ‘the children disengaged.'

These comments revealed an overriding sense that often pandemic ministry was more adult-focused, resulting in the exclusion of children," researchers said.

One survey of UK church activity during lockdown failed to ask a single question about children's or families ministry.

Collaboration between home, school, and church to support and nurture children's faith was lacking, and parents felt disempowered by the existing church culture to nurture their children's faith themselves.

Churches were often viewed as a "service provider" rather than a collaborator when it came to nurturing children's faith.

Researchers heard stories of how, even though the restrictions imposed by Covid were easing in some countries, children and families were not returning to church.

"As the pandemic restrictions ease, these impacts seem to continue, as many anecdotal reports in each of these nations indicate that children and families are not returning to pre-pandemic levels of attendance in church activities or programs."

When asked what their families' spiritual needs were, only one per cent of parents wanted their church to return to its pre-pandemic ministry; 97 per cent said that they wanted the church to offer more support to parents to help to nurture children's faith.

The report said that there was an "urgent" need for churches and church organisations to prioritise children's ministry, setting a clear strategy and prioritising "greater relational connection, rather than being primarily content or program-driven", the study concludes.

• Rebecca Pavely writes for Church Times

Intersex Awareness Day (October 26) is therefore an opportunity to examine how much progress has been made and how far we still have to go.

It's estimated 1.7 to 4% of people globally are intersex - meaning they don't fit within typical female or male norms.

In particular, the rights of children with intersex variations are coming under scrutiny.

With surgery in infancy or early childhood still considered an option, questions are now being asked about how to ensure no child is subjected to unnecessary procedures or treatment, and that the child's consent is obtained for necessary interventions.

Surgery can be delayed

Intersex people have variations in sex characteristics that can occur naturally at the level of chromosomes, hormones and/or anatomy.

There is a wide range of variations. Hypospadias, where the urethral opening appears on the underside of the penis, is most common. Although not a health problem, surgery to alter the hypospadic appearance is "routine" in many places, including Aotearoa New Zealand.

The latest Ministry of Health data shows that in 2017-18, 265 people aged under 15 were diagnosed with hypospadias, with 206 surgical operations performed - 85% of those operations performed on children aged under five.

These surgeries could be delayed until the children are older and able to give or refuse consent. There is no clear biomedical basis for such surgery, it is not lifesaving and it puts the child at risk (as surgery inevitably does).

While there are some gonadal variations (affecting the development of ovaries or testes) that can be life-threatening and require surgical treatment, few variations in sex characteristics are life-threatening in infancy.

Surgery on children with genital variations might appear to promote wellbeing but research highlights the harmful effects of any surgery intended to produce a more "male" or more "female" genital appearance.

Like their overseas counterparts, Aotearoa New Zealand intersex people who have spoken publicly have opposed the interventions they underwent as children.

Who gives consent?

The issue of genital surgery has implications for the legal rights of New Zealanders with variations in sex characteristics, including their right to refuse medical treatment, and the rules around informed consent.

The young age at which most surgeries are carried out means consent is provided by parents, who have the right and responsibility to decide on important matters affecting the child, including non-routine medical treatment.

With such decisions, the best interests and welfare of the child in their particular circumstances must be the paramount consideration. The right to be fully informed is contained in the Code of Health and Disability Services Rights.

In essence, every New Zealander has a right to an explanation of their condition and an explanation of the options available, including risks, side effects, costs and benefits of each option, and honest and accurate answers to questions, including the results of research.

But intersex advocates in Aotearoa New Zealand argue that they and their families have been isolated from sources of information and from others in similar situations.

And there is the added complexity of current responses to intersex variations being insensitive to cultural contexts, reflecting as they do binary Western constructions of gender that categorise individuals as either male or female.

International progress

The issue of genital surgery is gaining traction in international law. For example, the right to be protected from degrading treatment was extended to health-care settings in 2013, with the call from a UN special rapporteur for states to repeal any law allowing genital-normalising surgery when "enforced or administered without the free and informed consent of the person concerned."

Overall, the right to health is violated when states fail to take steps to prevent young children from undergoing medically unnecessary, irreversible and involuntary surgery and treatment.

In 2016, the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child recommended Aotearoa New Zealand develop and implement a healthcare protocol for intersex children, based on children's rights, setting the procedures and steps to be followed by health teams.

This followed a submission to the committee from Aotearoa New Zealand's Human Rights Commission. The UN committee called on the country to ensure no one is subjected to unnecessary medical or surgical treatment during infancy or childhood, and to guarantee the child's right to bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination.

In response to the recommendations of the UN committee, as well as domestic advocacy, the Ministry of Health directed the Paediatric Society to set up an intersex working group to develop guidelines for infants born intersex.

But this has so far failed to make significant changes to the practice of surgical intervention on children's genitalia.

Aotearoa New Zealand can do better

Meanwhile, advocates continue to call for legislation to defer interventions until children themselves are capable of consenting or expressing their own views.

Central to any policy, legislative or medical development must be the child's right to be free from discrimination.

Children have the right to have their voices heard. This means, with the exception of life-saving treatment, any interventions should be postponed until a child is competent to decide.

Where necessary, a skilled, independent advocate should be appointed to represent the child's interests. Current medical practice in Aotearoa New Zealand falls well short of those goals.

• Claire Breen Professor of Law, University of Waikato and Katrina Roen Professor of Sociology, University of Waikato.
• First published in The Conversation.
• The authors are grateful to the contribution of researchers Craig Dempster and Sam Johnston, and to members of the Intersex Health and Well-Being Working Group (Incentive), who gave feedback on an earlier draft.

Indeed, we can only love something insofar as we direct our pure, generous attention toward it—be that to God, to a neighbour or to ourselves.

And in a world that so hungrily demands it, we should examine where we spend this finite resource. One such place rests in our very pockets.

Today, social media is a staple of our personal—and even spiritual—lives.

Bible study groups on Facebook, inspirational Christian accounts on Instagram, evangelical dating sites and viral sermons on TikTok are modernizing our religious landscape.

The more optimistic tout "digital discipleship" as the next best tool for spreading the Gospel.

But Christians should occasionally step back to evaluate new technology in terms of biblical guidance.

Before adopting any cultural innovation, we must have the courage to ask: Is there, perhaps, a snake in this garden?

Christians should occasionally step back to evaluate new technology in terms of biblical guidance.

There is a snake, and it is particularly interested in our children.

On March 18, Facebook announced plans to launch Instagram Youth, a version of the popular photo-sharing app designed specifically for 8- to-12-year-olds.

Despite public outrage, Facebook is not backing down from this decision, offering us a ripe opportunity for spiritual discernment.

Jesus teaches that "every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit" (Mt 7:17), so let us examine the fruits of this tree.

Studies have linked the excessive use of social media, especially Instagram, to childhood depression, anxiety, suicide, eating disorders, cyberbullying, narcissism, attention disorders, obesity and vulnerability to sexual predators.

According to a recent article in The Wall Street Journal, Facebook's own researchers have acknowledged Instagram's harmful effects, admitting in a March 2020 presentation posted to an internal message board that "We make body image issues worse for one in three teen girls."

But in their pursuit of profit, corporations such as Facebook ignore these known harms to children and the warnings of countless psychologists, lawmakers and doctors in their eagerness to ensnare new generations of consumers.

With a twisted root, how can we expect anything other than rotten fruit?

Materialistic consumption oils the cogs of the Instagram machine.

A recent study found that a startling 25 per cent of all Instagram posts were advertisements, and that statistic does not begin to include the abundance of corporate-funded "influencers" peddling exorbitant makeup routines, expensive clothing and superficially alluring lifestyles to children.

While radio, television and print media have long been funded by advertising, social media algorithms increase their potency by cleverly manipulating emotions; these algorithms promote feelings of constant inadequacy and addict users through Pavlovian dopamine hits that can come from sending and receiving "likes."

Even if Instagram Youth limits or excludes formal advertising, it would serve as a steppingstone to this harmful culture by normalizing image-based, materialistic values at a vulnerable age.

Corporations such as Facebook ignore these known harms to children and the warnings of countless psychologists, lawmakers and doctors in their eagerness to ensnare new generations of consumers.

The real possibilities of digital discipleship should not prevent Christians from engaging in honest conversations about the harms of technology. Continue reading

• Lucy Kidwell is a senior at Indiana University and co-chair of the Interfaith Work Group at Fairplay's Children's Screen Time Action Network, a grassroots group advocating for technology ethics.

Dame Rachel de Souza is urging governments and tech companies to introduce age verification checks.

She warned that access to hardcore pornography was shaping children's expectations of relationships and was partly to blame for thousands of testimonies of sexual harassment by schoolchildren published on the Everyone's Invited website over the last few months.

The testimonies prompted Ofsted to carry out a review of what was happening in schools. Its report, published last week, revealed that inspectors found sexual harassment and online sexual abuse to be a routine part of pupils' lives.

"We can't ignore that, nor should we," de Souza told the Observer.

"One area I'm clear on is that online hardcore pornography warps boys' expectations of normal relationships and normalises behaviours that girls are then expected to accept, and it's just too easy for children to access."

"Most children who have seen pornography say the first time it was accidental.

"In the real world, adults wouldn't leave something dangerous or inappropriate lying around for children to stumble upon - why should the internet be different?"

Recently, in her role as a member of the Gender Equality Advisory Council, she brought up the subject with G7 leaders.

She wants a focus on effective age verification online.

"Nobody thinks the acceptable price of privacy and freedom of choice for adults should be unrestricted access to porn for children," she said.

However, experts warned that blanket porn blocks may be neither effective nor helpful. Ruth Eliot, a sexual violence prevention specialist at the School of Sexuality Education, which runs workshops in schools, said that trying to stop young people from finding online porn was "a fool's errand".

"Abstinence-based education around sexuality has never worked. Young people choose to watch porn as a result of a perfectly natural and normal curiosity about sexuality.

"Instead of policing that, we should upskill them on how to experience porn in a way that makes them understand the cultural context and that it's not an instruction manual."

Ellena Martellozzo, an associate professor of criminology at Middlesex University, said her research showed that the priority should be on preventing children from accessing violent porn accidentally.

This kickstarts a cycle in which they shift from seeing it as "shocking" and "disgusting" to developing an interest in it.

"Children rely on porn to learn about sex and relationships when what they see isn't a healthy way of viewing relationships at all," she said. "Pornography is one of many risk factors that can lead to sexual violence." Continue reading

• Image: The Guardian

Skyrocketing house prices are prompting many landlords to sell, forcing up rents which are becoming unaffordable for many families.

Figures released to Checkpoint show that in September last year (the most recent figures available) there were 3350 households with one adult and at least one child in motels. Read more

Remarkably, evidence-based research doesn't always receive attention, while sensationalized stories that create a particular—and sometimes false—narrative do.

This ultimately misinforms and harms the public—not to mention efforts to keep kids safe.

Let's review some of the most common misunderstandings about clerical abuse in the Catholic Church.

Sexual abuse is much more common among Catholic priests than other groups of men

About 4 percent of Catholic clerics had credible or substantiated accusations of child sexual abuse of minors (both prepubescent children and postpubescent teens) during the last half of the 20th century (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2011).

Research data, although from limited small scale studies, finds the prevalence of clerical abuse among non-Catholic religious communities consistent with the Catholics.

If you review insurance claims against Church communities for sexual victimization perpetrated by their clerics, you'll find that that there is no difference between Catholic and non-Catholic groups (Zech, 2011).

A U.S. Department of Education study found that about 6 percent of public school teachers had credible or substantiated claims of sexual abuse of minor children under their charge (Shakeshaft, 2004a, 2004b) during the same timeframe as the Catholic clerical data was obtained.

Furthermore, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-5; American Psychiatric Association, 2013) report that approximately 3 to 5 percent of men meet the diagnostic criteria for pedophilia.

These numbers increase significantly if you include men who sexually violate postpubescent teenagers, which is illegal in most jurisdictions, but not a diagnosable psychiatric disorder according to the DSM-5.

There is no evidence that Catholic priests sexually abuse children or teens at rates higher than other groups of men, in or outside of religious communities.

Catholic clerical sexual abuse is still very common today

The relentless press attention gives the impression that sexual abuse of children is still commonplace in the Catholic Church, even though the vast majority of cases of clerical abuse occurred before the mid-1980s (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2011).

After the Church reforms articulated in the Dallas Charter and Essential Norms (United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2002a, 2002b), the number of new cases in the United States averaged about a dozen per year; during the past five years, it went down to about one new case per year.

The Church has gone from averaging about 660 new cases of abuse per year during the 1970s to about 1 new case per year since about 2014 (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2011; Steinfels, 2019; United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2018).

In fact, few realize that the well-known Pennsylvania grand jury report on clerical abuse in that state during the past 70 years found only two cases from the 21st century—with both cases already known and managed (Office of Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 2018; Steinfels, 2019).

Most clerical sex offenders victimize hundreds of children

Sensational cases of clerical abuse dominate the press.

The famous Fr. John Geoghan case in Boston that was highlighted in the 2002 Boston Globe's Spotlight report included credible or substantiated reports of 138 victims over many years (Boston Globe Investigative Staff, 2002). Other famous cases (e.g., Fr. James Porter in Massachusetts and Fr. Gilbert Gauthe in Louisiana) also included a large number of victims as well.

However, the average number of victims per offender is about one, and only 129 clerics accounted for more than a quarter of all known cases of abuse.

This suggests that a small number of serial offenders caused much of the abuse crisis (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2011).

Homosexual men are to blame for the clerical abuse problem

Many assume that homosexual men are the cause of the clerical sexual abuse problem in the Catholic Church. They note that about 80 percent of clerical abuse victims are boys (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2004, 2011).

Additionally, they report that Catholic clerics have a larger percentage of homosexual men than in the general population of men (Plante, 2007).

It is true that most victims of clerical abuse are boys. But research informs us that abusing clerics were "situational generalists" victimizing whoever they had access to and trust with (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2011; Terry & Ackerman, 2008).

Priests, historically, had easy and regular access to boys more so than girls (e.g., altar servers, all-boy schools, and sports teams).

Furthermore, sexual orientation is not a risk factor for child sexual victimization.

Homosexual men are, by definition, sexually interested in other men, not young children.

Thus, blaming homosexual men for the clerical abuse problem in the Catholic Church isn't supported by clinical or research data.

Mandatory celibacy causes Catholic priests to sexually abuse children

Catholic priests take a vow of celibacy and thus are not allowed to be married or partnered (Coleman, 2006; Cozzens, 2006; Manuel 2012; US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2006). Most other religious groups do not require celibacy of their clerics.

Many argue that celibacy places Catholic clerics at risk of sexually abusing children.

This isn't true.

Celibacy for any reason—such as religious vows, not having a suitable sexual partner, conflictual partnered relationships, medical or psychiatric disabilities, or personal choice—does not turn someone into a pedophile where children become the object of sexual desire. Celibacy may cause challenges with adult sexual expression that might result in a priest violating their religious vows with other adults but it doesn't increase the risk of child sexual abuse (Manuel, 2012).

Clerical offenders went into the priesthood so that they could abuse children

Some people believe that clerical sex offenders went into the priesthood and attended seminary intentionally to get easy access to children so that they could abuse them.

Research on sex-offending clerics tells us that most of these men had no intention of abusing anyone when they entered seminary (John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 2011; Plante, 1999, 2011).

There is no evidence that these men decided to attend seminary to become priests with the express purpose of sexually abusing children.

The Church has done nothing to keep children safe and offending priests out of ministry

Many believe that the Church has stonewalled any effort for reform.

However, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops has taken steps to address clerical sexual abuse.

In 2002, the Conference passed the Dallas Charter and Essential Norms that outlines national policies and procedures based on evidence-based best practices for dealing with clerical abuse (US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2002a, 2002b).

The Charter requires all dioceses and religious orders in the US to follow a series of strategies to combat clerical abuse.

These include

• Reporting all accusations of clerical abuse, no matter how long ago they occurred, to local law enforcement
• Establishing and maintaining a lay review board of local experts representing relevant professionals such as law enforcement, child protection, mental health, and such to review all cases of reported abuse
• Participating in yearly audits by an independent and secular auditing firm to ensure that all dioceses follow compliance efforts
• Removing all creditably accused clerics from ministry for life and keep them away from the public
• Hiring a victim assistance coordinator to support and advocate for victims of clerical abuse
• Offering safe environment child protection training for all involved with the Catholic Church including clerics, lay employees, volunteers, and even children.

Additionally, maintaining a national review board for child protection that includes national experts (US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2018).

More can always be done to prevent child abuse and to be sure that those who might harm children are kept out of ministry.

Vigilance is always important for children's safety.

But the fact that credible accusations have been reduced to an average of one new case per year in the United States from levels that were almost 700 times higher several decades ago at least suggests that these best practices are actually working effectively (Steinfels, 2019; US Conference of Catholic Bishops, 2018).

Conclusion

Commonly held misconceptions regarding clerical sexual abuse in the Catholic Church need to be dispelled if we wish to understand clerical sexual abuse in the Church and to be prepared to do all that we can to prevent it from occurring in the future.

Fortunately, best practices and quality research data is available to both provide safe environments for children in the church and to screen and better manage potential or current clerics that could be at risk of harming children (Praesidium, 2001).

An emotionally charged topic like child sexual abuse perpetrated by Catholic priests elicits strong feelings from people in and outside of the Catholic Church.

The story has resulted in national and international headline news on a regular basis for almost 20 years. It is critically important to separate facts from fiction to ensure that children are safe both within and outside of the Catholic community and that those who might harm children are identified and prevented from access to them.

To do otherwise would certainly be scandalous.

• Thomas G. Plante, Ph.D., ABPP
• Republished with permission of the author.
• To view bibliography, please see Psychology Today.

It'd be a difficult ask if you actually lived through its madness.

Maybe you might recall Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry movies is worthy of note, but I can only watch them in fury today - as I did then.

Starting in the late 60s, the only movie roles for young attractive women were the gamut of hair colours from blonde to brunette, with various accents and skin colours. They all behaved, regardless of the colour of their wigs, like that male invention, a nymphomaniac, dropping their undies for any cop with a swish-back hairdo and a big handgun.

The effect was comedic; the intention not even ironic. Feminists who dared to call for equality were portrayed as monsters. Clint couldn't stand them.

It seemed like everyone was slavering after young women who were "on the pill," the notorious new gateway to much bad sex. Hugh Hefner was taken seriously, even in his pyjamas.

And in New Zealand, we had Bert Potter's Centrepoint commune. I look back on that experiment as a turning point for middle-class values that left a legacy of unhappiness and regret.

Just how a former pest controller (no irony there either) came to be a guru of human sexuality can never really be explained, but Centrepoint was covered by a tame media as a credible pathway to the fully realised life, kids watching the adults in action, the old boy himself living his personal pornographic fantasy, while otherwise intelligent people joined up to be liberated from bourgeois hang-ups like fidelity and privacy.

It ended in crying. In a courtroom, fun looks so different, and excuses echo hollowly.

I expect there's embarrassment among many former livers of that dream who'd rather forget. I know there was real harm done to children, some of whom were fed ecstasy to make them co-operate with Centrepoint men.

And their parents thought that was OK. Or didn't think. There wasn't much thinking happening. Continue reading

Focusing his talk on the fourth of his "Healing the World" series, Francis is urging everyone to check statistics to see how many children are dying of hunger because of a poor distribution of wealth and a sick economic system.

We should also check many children do not have the right to school, for the same reason, he said.

"May it be this image, of children in need of hunger and lack of education, which helps us to understand that after this crisis we must come out better" and understand the need for change, he said.

Francis explained the pandemic and its social consequences are causing many people to be in danger of losing hope.

"The pandemic has highlighted and exacerbated social problems, especially inequality. Some may work from home, while for many others this is impossible."

"Some children, despite the difficulties, can continue to receive a school education, while for many others it has stopped abruptly."

"Some powerful nations can issue money to deal with the emergency, while for others this would mean mortgaging the future."

He said these symptoms of inequality are a social disease caused by "a virus that comes from a sick economy" and "the fruit of inequitable economic growth" that has taken place independent of fundamental human values.

"In today's world, a few of the very rich have more than the rest of humanity. [...] It is an injustice that cries out to heaven."

Francis said this economic model will result in irreversible consequences such loss of biodiversity, climate change, rising sea levels and the destruction of tropical forests.

"Social inequality and environmental degradation go hand in hand and have the same root, that of the sin of wanting to possess, of wanting to dominate brothers and sisters, of wanting to possess and dominate nature and God himself. But this is not the design of creation."

The transformation of money and property into ends in themselves, rather than as tools, had led to the emergence of individualistic and calculating people Francis calls "homo œconomicus."

"We forget that, being created in the image and likeness of God, we are social, creative and supportive beings, with an immense capacity to love. We often forget about this," he said.

"When the obsession with owning and dominating excludes millions of people from primary goods; when economic and technological inequality is such as to tear the social fabric; and when addiction to unlimited material progress threatens the common home, then we cannot stand by. No, this is bleak. We cannot stand and watch."

"After the crisis, will we continue with this economic system of social injustice and contempt for the care of the environment, of creation, of the common home?"

He hopes to inspire a healthier and more equitable world.

Source

• The Tablet
• Image: United Way Worldwide

"Might is right" is the thinking behind the three biggest military powers vying for prestige and power in the world.

The United States, Russia and China, despite being in the middle of a pandemic that is killing hundreds of thousands and infecting millions, continue to build up their armed forces and supply weapons to nations of the Saudi-led coalition making war on the Houthi in Yemen.

The most devastating war is that in Yemen, where thousands of civilians including many children have been killed and wounded, driven to near starvation by the air attacks of a Saudi-led coalition of Arab nations against Houthi rebels that took power in 2015.

The indiscriminate airstrikes against hospitals, clinics, schools, markets, mosques, houses and festival occasions are gross violations of international humanitarian and human rights laws.

The UN has said that as many as 10,000 people have been killed in the war and two-thirds of them have been civilians. The injured total so far is 55,000 and is increasing daily.

Amnesty International has visited Yemen and carefully documented as many as 42 indiscriminate airstrikes. The rights group confirmed the killing of 518 civilians and the wounding of 433.

The evidence was presented last October. In a successful court case, judges ruled that the UK arms trade to the coalition for the war in Yemen was illegal. Even so, the arms manufacturers find ways to supply weapons by using other countries as intermediaries.

Deadly cluster bombs, banned under international law but still manufactured in the United States, the UK and Brazil, have been found in Yemen.

They scatter dozens of smaller bomblets that explode when touched. The exploded remains of missiles supplied by Western countries have been found and documented as evidence of war crimes against the suppliers.

If not killed by bombs and bullets supplied by the arms-manufacturing nations, then cholera, Covid-19, typhoid and starvation have killed thousands more.

An estimated 22 million people in Yemen need humanitarian aid. It is a horrific war bringing death and destruction.

A school bus filled with children received a direct hit in Dahyan from a missile fired by a coalition jet fighter. At least 29 children were killed outright and 30 were seriously injured, a terrible war crime among many for which no one has been held accountable.

Jan Egeland, secretary-general of the Norwegian Refugee Council, said it was a "grotesque, shameful" attack and showed a "blatant disregard for the rules of war."

Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates have the most fighter jets and troops in the fighting, while Egypt, Jordan, Sudan and Morocco have given their support.

It is a war against their traditional enemy, Iran, which is supporting the rebels.

The Houthi rebels are also responsible for many civilian deaths.

Behind the coalition are the suppliers of arms, jet planes, missiles, weapons of all kinds.

The Saudi Arabian spending spree is a boon for the arms suppliers who welcome war and weapons sales.

A Google search will show that the main US companies in the arms trade selling to Saudi Arabia are: Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, General Dynamics, Northrop Grumman, General Electric, Exxon Mobil, Halliburton, Honeywell, McDermott International and Jacobs Engineering Group.

The US and the UK are the biggest suppliers of jets and missiles and munitions to Saudi Arabia.

The Saudis also buy weapons from France, Italy and Spain. Denmark, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden have announced that they will stop selling weapons to members of the coalition, but if they have done so is not clear since billions of dollars in contracts are on offer or have been signed.

So the war rages on.

Money is made by all and the carnage in Yemen continues as the world watches helplessly and too paralyzed to intervene as the arms traders and manufacturers do their dirty, death-dealing business with the approval of their respective governments that issue export licenses for the weapons.

Russia is busy arming and supporting Syrian tyrant Bashar al-Assad, who is going after the last remaining opposition rebels in Ilibid.

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has given support to the rebels holding the province.

Assad's army, armed and backed by Russian planes, advance and allegedly bomb hospitals, mosques and markets.

Thousands more civilians are fleeing to the Turkish border where over 1.5 million have taken shelter for the past several years of the nine-year civil war. It is now a stand-off between Syria and Turkey.

In Asia, the United States Navy and the Chinese are escalating from a war of words and consulate closures to near-confrontations in the South China Sea and the West Philippine Sea.

Two US aircraft carriers and support destroyers are patrolling the international waters claimed exclusively by China where it has grabbed and occupied islands belonging to the nations in the region.

The US Navy is planning to return to Subic Bay, Philippines, which it lost in 1991, in a purely commercial deal where US and Australian shipyard companies will buy the former Hanjin ship repair facility and provide repair services to the US Navy.

This will deny the port and yards to Chinese investors who were negotiating with the Philippine government to take them over. Washington and the Philippine Navy oppose the Chinese bid. The rivalry will continue for years to come.

• Irish missionary Father Shay Cullen, SSC, established the Preda Foundation in Olongapo City in the Philippines in 1974 to promote human rights and the rights of children, especially victims of sex abuse.
• The views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of CathNews.

The $NZ11.2 million 'Impact programme,' to which New Zealand's foreign ministry will contribute about $NZ8.6 million, targets children, youth and their families in Kiribati, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, Cambodia, Vietnam, and the Solomon Islands over the next five years. Read more