What is interesting is new information about the difference between those who identify as sole Maori and those who identify as Maori/other, and the results also include males who were asked if they got a partner pregnant or became a parent under 20.
The following is a quote from the ' discussion':
Two major findings emerged from these analyses. First, respondents having a sole Māori cultural identity had odds of early pregnancy and parenthood that were over seven times higher than those of non-Māori, while those of Māori/other cultural identity had odds of early pregnancy and parenthood that were over three times higher than non-Māori. These results were evident for both males and females. Also, those of sole Māori cultural identity had rates of pregnancy and parenthood that were significantly (p < .05) greater than those of Māori/other cultural identity. Similar findings were obtained using an alternative method of classifying Māori identity. These findings are consistent with the view that cultural identity plays an important role in ethnic differences, since rates of early pregnancy/parenthood increased steadily with increasing Māori cultural identity.
Further analysis suggested that, in part, the associations between cultural identity and early pregnancy/parenthood were due to socio-economic and family-related factors. After adjustment for these factors, those of sole Māori identity had rates of early pregnancy and parenthood that were more than three times higher than those of non-Māori and those of Māori/other identity. Again, similar results were found for males and females, and these findings were replicated in a supplementary analysis using an alternative measure of Māori identity.
Collectively these findings suggest that the higher rates of early pregnancy and parenthood among Māori are a consequence of a combination of socio-economic, family and cultural factors that combine to place young Māori at significantly increased risks of early pregnancy and parenthood. The implications of these conclusions are discussed below.
Although it has been argued that early parenting has been constructed as a problem by the health profession (e.g. Barker 1998), there is evidence that draws links between early age of pregnancy and greater likelihood of negative outcomes for offspring and parents (Coley and Chase-Lansdale 1998, Fergusson and Woodward 1999, Singh et al. 2001, Hobcraft and Kiernan 2001, Mantell et al. 2004, Ministry of Social Development 2008a, Robson and Berthoud 2006, Woodward et al. 2006, Boden et al. 2008). The results of the present study suggest that Māori, and in particular individuals of sole Māori cultural identity, are at increased risk of early pregnancy/parenthood. It could therefore be argued that at least some of the social disadvantage experienced by Māori in New Zealand may be due in part to increased rates of early pregnancy/parenthood among those of sole Māori cultural identity.
It "could therefore be argued?"
What are these people frightened of?
6 comments:
It makes me wonder how this matches up with abortion rate. Are Maori women less likely to abort their babies?
From NZ Statistics:
"In 2008, there were 10,499 abortions to women who identified with the European ethnic group (either as their only ethnic group or as one of their ethnic groups). There were 4,250 abortions to women who identified with the Māori ethnic group, 2,875 to women who identified with the Asian ethnic group, 2,230 to women who identified with the Pacific ethnic group, and 206 women who identified with the MELAA (Middle Eastern, Latin American, and African) ethnic grouping. "
And:
"In the December 2008 year, the European ethnic group gained 44,530 babies, Māori 18,840,
Pacific peoples 10,120, Asian 7,260, MELAA (Middle Eastern, Latin American and African) 1,170
and Other (including New Zealanders) 560. "
(Leaving aside the issue of stillbirths) put the two together. More likely than Pacific, about the same as European and less likely than Asian.
It could be argued that my head hurts??!!
It’s plausible to see Maori early parenting as just a continuation of a successful evolutionary strategy of having children while the mother is young and healthy and also while the grandmother is young and healthy enough to confer her time and resources on her mokopunas.
Now the state is proxy grandmother, and welfare is partly responsible for dismantling what was once a pretty successful system.
No wonder it is called Nanny State.
It can't just be benefits, though: everyone has access to the same set of government payments in case of early birth. It would have to instead be some interaction between benefits and race-adjusted expectations of future earnings. So where lifetime earnings are not expected to be high, less is foregone by early birth and getting onto benefit.
Post a Comment