Friday, December 30, 2016

Inculcating students and selling books

Two professors wrote a book called Urban poverty, penal welfare and health inequalities.

Here is a brief precis. I note,

"New Zealand’s once-humanitarian welfare system genuinely supported those in need, says Professor Darrin Hodgetts."

The thrust of the book is that welfare has become punitive and demeans those who need it.

The welfare system the professor refers to can only be that established in the late 1930s for the very reason that there was little support for the needy prior.

From that time until the 1960-70s it was impossible to get a sickness or invalid benefit if you could not prove you were of good moral character and had not been the active cause of your own misfortune. Specifically, "That incapacity for work was not self—induced or in any way brought about with a view to qualifying for an invalid's benefit."

You could not get a deserted wife benefit if you didn't apply for maintenance from the father of your children. Unmarried mothers frequently felt they had little choice but to give up their child for adoption.

Is this the "once-humanitarian" welfare system referred to?

Or was it the period before the early nineties when sole parents piled onto welfare at an astounding rate. So astounding that after only 2 years of the DPB, a ministerial inquiry was being called.

 As a result a stand-down period was established and marriage guidance counselling made effectively compulsory. Solo mothers protested. Is that the "once-humanitarian welfare system" referred to?

It can't be the system post early-1990s because that's after the benefits cuts -  the neoliberal policies that the book attacks - along with the current welfare system, those who designed the policies and deliver the services.

I don't believe the "once-humanitarian welfare system" ever existed. But that's not the point. That's just my opinion.

The point is this new book is required reading in course work (along with a plethora of other leftist claptrap).

No doubt the publishers were also well aware of guaranteed sales when accepting the manuscript.


Anonymous said...

I love the term "good moral character" because it implies accountability. Our "adopted" young lady has just been turfed out, instantly and without ceremony, after 18 months of effort and thousands of dollars because she failed this objective test. It was surprisingly easy to do as well because of the reaction to being confronted. Good riddance and thank common sense she doesn't have custody of her child. Without us she can't see her child as wife was required to supervise because, ironically, wife passed the "good moral character" test during the Family Court shenanigans. Wife is relieved, after a couple of days of soul searching, that I did the hard thing so, briefly, I have capital to squander.


Mark Wahlberg said...

New Year greetings to you Lindsay.

Horror stories of a dysfunctional welfare system are the stuff of folklore in NZ. When my first marriage disintergrated in the late eighties due to irreconcilable differences, my wife applied for and was granted the DPB for herself and the children.At this point the "humanitarian welfare system" unaware of my personal circumstances, declared war on me. I was interviewed by an officious gentleman, who, making no secret of his dislike of me,informed me the "system" would provide my wife with unlimited legal advice and I should accept their determination which would have taken 60 percent of my income as maintenance and limited contact with my children.

Representing myself in court, I had the good fortune to met a understanding judge who was unimpressed with the "humanitarian welfare Systems" treatment of me and ordered them to reach an agreement with me which I found acceptable.

I might add, that particular judge, was one of only two,(there have been several) I have stood before on my journey through life, who have exorcised common sense when dealing with bureaucratic systems which have a them and us attitude.

Half an hour ago while writing this, I was informed an associate whom I liked very much, abandoned his battle with a dysfunctional health system and committed suicide yesterday. It appears he left detailed instructions as to how things should proceed. I have mixed emotions at this moment.

Lindsay Mitchell said...

I am very sorry to hear that Mark. There appears to be a huge, largely unacknowledged problem with mental ill-health and the lack of resources to deal with it. I expect that you will have difficulty getting your friend's departure out of your mind for some time. I hope you have support (company) to deal with it.

Mark Wahlberg said...

Thankyou Lindsay. I'm fortunate to have good people to share the moment with.

I know its no good looking for answers to the riddle as they are many and varied and involve a lifetime of struggle. Whats difficult to deal with is everyone thought the sun was shinning, when actually dark storms raged.

Calculated and clinical suggest a high degree of commitment to the task ahead.