● RADIOAdvertise with us
DOWNUNDERVOICESAustralia · New Zealand · World
Back to New Zealand
New Zealand

4 September 2026

The Lindsay Clancy case looks tragically like NZ’s Lauren Dickason trial. Here’s where they differ

Downunder Voices Newsroom

FacebookEmail
The Lindsay Clancy case looks tragically like NZ’s Lauren Dickason trial. Here’s where they differ

A legal defence of infanticide exists in NZ and other similar jurisdictions. But it is not an option in US courts, making the Clancy jury’s job more difficult.

About this report

This article contains independently written commentary and community perspective from Downunder Voices.

Join our community

Follow Downunder Voices

Join thousands of readers following news and community stories from Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific.

Follow on FacebookSubmit your story

More from New Zealand

View category

Read Next

View latest
MDMA in therapy: cautious hope for NZ’s PTSD patientsSocial Issues

5 September 2026

MDMA in therapy: cautious hope for NZ’s PTSD patients

New Zealand has taken a measured step in mental health care: one of the country’s psychiatrists has been granted permission to prescribe MDMA as part of controlled therapy sessions for patients with PTSD. That development is not a moment for euphoric headlines, nor is it cause for reflexive alarm. It is a cautious, clinical advance that deserves careful public attention. For many people with post-traumatic stress disorder, conventional treatments — whether psychotherapy, medication or a combination — offer relief but not always full recovery. The decision to permit a psychiatrist to use MDMA in a controlled therapeutic context reflects a widening of the toolkit available to clinicians working with severely affected patients. For those individuals and their families, the prospect of an additional, closely managed option can be life-changing. Controlled use is the crucial qualifier. The permission applies to regulated therapy sessions, not recreational use. That ensures treatment is delivered by trained professionals within a therapeutic framework designed to manage risks, monitor outcomes and provide follow-up care. It is precisely this regulated clinical environment that differentiates medical use from the unregulated consumption that communities rightly worry about. Still, ordinary Kiwis have legitimate questions. How will such therapies be made available? What safeguards will be in place to prevent misuse? How will success be measured, and what support will patients receive afterwards? Because the approach is novel in the public imagination, transparency about selection criteria, monitoring, and evaluation will be essential for public confidence. There is also a larger policy conversation to be had about access and equity. If treatments using MDMA show promise for patients with otherwise treatment-resistant PTSD, how will health services ensure they are not available only to a privileged few? New therapies often begin in specialist clinics; the policy challenge is to plan for broader, equitable access should clinical evidence support expansion. Finally, this moment highlights the importance of research and ongoing evaluation. Granting permission for a psychiatrist to prescribe MDMA in controlled sessions is not an end point but part of a process that should generate data on efficacy and safety. That evidence will inform whether the approach moves from a limited, specialist intervention to a more widely available treatment option. For patients and families grappling with the daily realities of PTSD, a new, carefully regulated therapy option brings justified optimism. For the rest of the country, it is an opportunity to engage in a sober, evidence-based conversation about how best to broaden and improve mental health care. Sensible oversight, equitable planning and rigorous evaluation will determine whether this cautious step becomes a meaningful advance in how New Zealand treats trauma.

Community angle

People living with PTSD and their families may gain a new treatment option; the public needs transparency on safeguards, access and how outcomes will be evaluated.

Source: https://www.rnz.co.nz/rss/news.xmlOriginal source
Teach boys to be guardians, not threats — St Joseph’s headmaster set a standardSocial Issues

5 September 2026

Teach boys to be guardians, not threats — St Joseph’s headmaster set a standard

A simple but powerful line from the headmaster of St Joseph’s College in Sydney deserves more than passing praise. Addressing an all-boys school, he told his pupils: ‘I want every young woman who encounters a Joe Boy to be safer because you are there — not merely safe from you, safer because of you’. That formulation recognises what too many public discussions about violence and safety fail to: responsibility is not only about preventing harm, it can also be about fostering active guardianship and respect. When a leader at a high-profile boys’ school says this to his students, it matters. Schools are one of the chief places where young men learn the habits and expectations that shape their adult behaviour. For parents and communities, it is reassuring to hear authority figures explicitly connect masculinity with protection, empathy and positive action rather than with dominance or entitlement. The praise the headmaster received is a reminder that clear, values-driven messages delivered in the right setting can help shift social norms. This is not merely rhetoric. Ordinary Australians live with the consequences of how men are socialised — in workplaces, on streets and in homes. A generation of young men who see their role as contributing to safety will look out for their friends, intervene earlier when someone is being harassed or coerced, and treat consent as an active, ongoing practice. That mindset reduces harm not by scolding or ostracising, but by building everyday habits of care. Of course, a speech in assembly cannot do the work alone. Schools must back up strong language with curriculum, pastoral care and policies that teach practical skills: how to recognise coercion, how to intervene safely, how to support survivors, and how to examine harmful cultural scripts. Leaders who make bold statements should be held to account to ensure their institutions follow through. Parents also have a part to play: modelling respectful relationships at home, engaging with what children are taught at school, and reinforcing the idea that masculinity and responsibility are not mutually exclusive. The broader community and policymakers should note the value of leadership from within boys’ schools. Often, debates about violence prevention are framed as things done to men — awareness campaigns, restrictions or legal penalties. What we need more of is the affirmative project: helping boys become the kind of men who actively make their communities safer. The praise for the St Joseph’s headmaster is deserved because his words point in that direction. A cultural shift takes time, and no single speech will end violence. But leaders who speak plainly and constructively about the role young men can play help create the conditions for change. For everyday Australians — parents, neighbours and young people themselves — that is the kind of leadership worth supporting and demanding more of across our schools and communities.

Community angle

Parents, teachers and young men should see school leadership as central to changing attitudes that affect safety in everyday life; practical follow-up in curriculum and pastoral care is essential.

Source: 7NEWS AustraliaOriginal source