Infant deaths are not a fait accompli

STUFF claims a letter was dropped off anonymously to the organization detailing deaths of 57 children since Oranga Tamariki came into being in 2017. OT's chief social worker was interviewed by Jack Tame and did not deny the number. It is consistent with the oft-cited historical statistic that every five weeks a child in New Zealand dies from abuse.

There are other consistencies that accompany these deaths. They occur in state houses. The perpetrators are on benefits. The children are already known to Oranga Tamariki. In the latest case of toddler Ruthless-Empire the child was not in the care of OT but "on their books".

The victims are also disproportionately Maori. Apologists will assert this is because Maori are more likely to suffer from poverty and its causes, for instance, addiction and unemployment. These are hollow excuses for making the lives of totally vulnerable and dependent children miserable and painful. And too often, very short.

But why is this pattern so sickeningly predictable yet seemingly unavoidable?

Ground-breaking research from the Auckland University of Technology (led by Rhema Vaithianathan who is now assisting a number of US jurisdictions applying her work in a practical way) investigated the factors which are common to child abuse and neglect cases. CYF data was linked to multiple administrative records including from the benefit system. A major finding was:

"Of all children having a finding of maltreatment by age 5, 83% are seen on a benefit before age 2."

In other words the vast majority of substantiated abuse occurs in the population dependent on benefits. For the 2007 birth cohort, around three quarters of maltreatment findings by age two involved children of single parents, which provides a clue as to which particular benefit.

Turning to the rates of abuse, the incidence of maltreatment by age 2 was 10% for those children whose caregivers who had received a benefit for 80% or more of the past five years. In contrast, for those who had spent no time on a benefit, the finding dropped to 0.3 percent. The difference is massive. Expressed as a likelihood, the child in the habitually-benefit dependent home is 33 times more likely to be abused.

Unsurprisingly there are other factors that significantly influence findings. The percentages of children with a substantiated finding by age two with the following circumstances are:

• Other children with a care and protection record in last five years (34.9%)
• Mother or caregiver aged under 25 (53.5%)
• One plus address changes recorded in benefit data in last year (26.1%)
• Single parent (74.3%)
• High deprivation neighbourhood deciles 8-10 (69%)*

The mother of Baby Ru had failed with an earlier child and had only assumed care of her latest when he was around eighteen months; OT was involved to some degree; she is young and moves around. As yet her benefit status is unknown.

So a number of the predictive factors were there.

Back to the research which also produced findings for Maori children separately. Across all of the variables the incidence of child maltreatment was elevated. Fifty nine percent of the those born in 2007 and abused by age two were Maori.

So to some degree just being Maori increases the risk. Most Maori children are safe and cherished but their risk of abuse or neglect is higher. Baby Ru also ticked that predictor box. And while abuse statistics are not mortality statistics, abuse is usually the precursor to the death of an infant.

The killing of children has gone on for a long time. The first inquiry in New Zealand occurred in the 1960s. So I didn't expect to find anything new or useful to say but reflecting on this little guy and the work of Rhema Vaithianathan, I wonder again why, as a society, we let it go on?

Due to ethical and stigmatisation concerns, in 2015 the National government eventually rejected the proposal to establish a tool that could predict the most at-risk newborns with a view to early intervention. MSD Minister Anne Tolley famously said, "Not on my watch."

Vaithianathan responded:

“We shouldn’t resile from the problems we face around maltreatment of children in New Zealand or from radical solutions like this that would allow resources to be targeted accurately. The social service sector in NZ needs a data-driven, evidence-based revolution. We are still tinkering at the edges and children are the losers.”

Eight years have passed. By omission we tacitly accept deaths will continue.

By commission, we continue to provide no-strings weekly cash payments to furnish lifestyles that are downright dangerous for very young children.

BUT ... the country has voted for change. It is not in the mood for more prevarication and excuse-making.

The incoming MSD Minister should get the good professor in his or her office next week and start talking.

* "Based on conservatively linked data. This is known to understate the proportions with CYF contact and findings of maltreatment."

Welfare and the wasted opportunity

MSD released its annual report for 2022/23 yesterday. There is bad news. The average future years expected on a main benefit has increased yet again.

The crosses below indicate failed direction of trend which is explained with: "This KPI did not meet the direction because of less favourable economic forecasts (including higher unemployment rates), lower exit rates and changes in our client mix from those requiring support during the COVID-19 pandemic."

But hang on. The direction has been wrong since 2017. Here are the figures from last year’s annual report.

Apart from the first nation-wide lockdown the unemployment rate (depicted by the red line below) has generally decreased from 4.9 to 3.6 percent.

Against a backdrop of a mostly strong labour market MSD has overseen a substantial rise in the time people are staying dependent on welfare.

Unlike the previous National government, the Labour government did not set an official target of reducing dependency. Rather MSD measures their ‘success’ in building trust and confidence in clients; in timeliness of access and availability of assistance; in equity of outcomes for Maori; client satisfaction with family violence services; and in building awareness of and access to support.

This ‘kindness’ arose from recommendations by the Cindy Kiro-led Welfare Expert Advisory Group convened by the incoming Ardern government of 2017. MSD would counter criticism claiming that they have generally met their KPIs built around these measures.

But what does the funder of MSD (the productive taxpayer) actually want to see?

Not numbers like these:

What taxpayers want (those of us who voted for change anyway) is a return to welfare for the genuinely needy. For those who have suffered misfortune through no fault of their own and cannot be self-sustaining.

Labour squandered a rare opportunity to significantly reduce welfare dependency. While the borders were closed thousands could have taken up the employment opportunities presented. Instead, numbers on welfare stagnated and the time spent there only got longer.

It is absolutely critical for the new government to turn this around. With an ageing population and declining birth rate (also faced by the other countries we compete with), labour force shortages will continue.

The new government doesn’t need to cut benefits. They just need to require anyone who can work to take the job on offer.

In the long run that would be the far kinder option for all parties concerned.

'Most open and transparent government ever'

Three weeks ago I highlighted a very disturbing trend in benefit numbers.

In the ten week period to September 15, 2023 the number of people on a main benefit rose by 6,768 or almost two percent, whereas in the ten week period ending September 16, 2022 the numbers were virtually flat with a very small decrease of 141 recipients.

I would like to be able to tell you that the trend has been arrested but after the last report was published on 22/9/2023 and showed a further one week increase of 948 the data stopped appearing.

The reason given is "processing delays".

Perhaps campaign sensitivities might be closer to the truth.

For three weeks now no updated data has been made public.

Election day eve is as good a time as ever to remind ourselves that Jacinda Ardern promised New Zealanders the most open and transparent government ever.

Checking out Carmel Sepuloni's campaign claims

Radio NZ reports that Minister for Social Development Carmel Sepuloni was on the campaign trail in Christchurch yesterday defending her government’s performance. She said that:

“Her government had seen higher numbers of beneficiaries moving into jobs …”

Yet the numbers on a Jobseeker benefit continue to climb.

Technically her assertion may be true but it’s like someone claiming they’ve been making higher numbers of credit card repayments while continuing to over-use the same card and grow the debt.

Higher numbers may have been moving into jobs, but even higher numbers have been moving onto benefits. It’s the net difference that matters and when she is back in opposition Sepuloni will be using exactly that measure to mount attacks on the government.

FACT: At September 22, 2023 there were 181,167 people on a Jobseeker benefit. In September 2017, just prior to Sepuloni taking up the reins, the number was 120,726. She has overseen a fifty percent increase.

Back to the RNZ report:

“The majority of people went on a benefit for a short time to get a helping hand, Sepuloni said.”

Again, over a given period, this might technically be true but it’s a claim intended to mask the true and worrying situation.

FACT: Three quarters of beneficiaries have been dependent for more than a year and MSD’s annual report shows that average future expected time on a benefit grew from 10.7 years in 2018 to 12.8 years in 2022.

Today Sepuloni is saying:

"I’m proud of the work Labour has done to lift over 77,000 children out of poverty.” 

FACT:  At September 2017 there were 172,302 children on benefits. By June 2023 that number had grown by 23 percent to sit at 211,617.

Rest assured that whatever Sepuloni would rather sweep under the carpet right now will miraculously become a problem during the 54^th New Zealand parliament odds-on to be led by a National/ACT government.

A conundrum for those pushing racist dogma

The heavily promoted narrative, which has ramped up over the last six years, is that Maori somehow have special vulnerabilities which arise from outside forces they cannot control; that contemporary society fails to meet their needs. They are not receptive to messages and opportunities in the same way as other races because the trauma of colonisation carried from one generation to the next. 

We are told, whether it's health or education, Maori cannot be reached, or cannot access, or cannot receive current 'best practice' because it is couched in racism. Until our institutions look through a Maori worldview lens, inequity and injustice will continue. Progress will be impossible. These are the circumstances that New Zealand's academic institutions and public agencies have accepted, embraced and acted on.

So I have a conundrum for them.

Teenage births are considered, by many, to be undesirable. Sixty years ago they led to shot-gun marriages; thirty years ago (and since) to long term dependence on welfare. They often lead to undesirable outcomes for offspring. After all, teen-age mothers are barely more than children themselves, and the biological fathers of their children seldom actively participate in parenting.

But as females became better educated and independent, they themselves started to question the wisdom of premature pregnancy and all that it entailed. In an ultra-connected world, reality TV programmes like Sixteen and Pregnant followed the lives of teenage mothers, exposing the difficulties and hardships they experienced and were viewed by millions worldwide.

Health authorities put ever increasing efforts into reducing teen births through contraception education and availability, especially new long-acting reversible contraceptives and the morning-after pill. Secondary schools provided more guidance and advice.

In terms of welfare reform, where births were not prevented, the Ministry of Social Development got closer to the mothers, exercising control of their benefit money, connecting them to mentors, ensuring GP enrolment and keeping them in study. Unconditional cash stopped.

From youth surveys it seems young people are increasingly delaying sex and /or avoiding pregnancy.

The result?

Teenage births have plummeted BUT for Maori and non-Maori alike (as did abortions by the way).

 

Whatever factors are driving this steep decline, Maori females responded in exactly the same way as non-Maori females.

This phenomenon gives lie to much of the hitherto described propaganda which is now pushed as 'fact'.

Yes, Maori teenage births are still more common - and still leading to benefit dependence - but that's actually another issue.

The point here is, regardless of ethnicity, teenage girls are subject to and responding to the same social stimuli in the same way.

Maori females are throwing a spanner into the works. They challenge the current orthodoxy.

Perhaps the orthodoxy is unsound?

Alarming trend in benefit numbers

While there will not be another quarterly release of benefit numbers prior to the election, limited weekly reporting continues and is showing an alarming trend.

Because there is a seasonal component to benefit number fluctuations it is crucial to compare like with like. In the ten week period to September 15, 2023 the number of people on a main benefit has risen by 6,768 or almost two percent, whereas in the ten week period ending September 16, 2022 the numbers were virtually flat with a very small decrease of 141 recipients.

The finance minister Grant Robertson continues to insist the economy is in good shape. This real time indicator would strongly suggest otherwise.

85 percent of the increase is in Jobseeker Support. In turn, over a third of the increased Jobseeker Support is in those receiving Jobseeker/Health Condition or Disability.

These are people who could be working if they could access health treatments.

The detail about the nature of their health conditions is not provided in weekly updates but quarterly trends point to  psychological/psychiatric conditions playing a large part.

Prime Minister Chris Hipkins claimed in the TV1 leaders debate that the health system is not in crisis. He also constantly boasts about "record low unemployment".

Make of it what you will.

But these numbers don't lie and in the past ten weeks thousands more have lost jobs or become too sick to work.

It must be deeply upsetting for them to hear the Prime Minister willfully ignoring their plight; indeed, denying their very existence.

Sources:

https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/weekly-reporting/2022/sep/data-file-income-support-weekly-update-16-september-2022.xlsx

https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/weekly-reporting/2023/sep/data-file-income-support-weekly-update-15-september-2023.xlsx

"Oranga Tamariki has lost trust and confidence"

Oranga Tamariki has just released a review of its secure facilities and community homes for youth and children. This followed allegations of inappropriate staff behaviour in June 2023. Shedding light on what drove such an incident:

"In the cases we heard of harmful behaviour, such as allegations about staff providing young people with vapes or other contraband, allowing inappropriate movies or standing by during fights, the prevailing driver was surviving the shift safely."

The report is damning and sad. Staff morale is clearly very low as they struggle with, amongst other challenges, 'review fatigue'. It would seem the only constant in their environment is change.

Like other front line agencies they do not have enough workers. Youth justice facilities should be able to take 171 residents but can only staff 133. Demand is increasing. While overall youth offending is declining, the seriousness is not and the report refers to an "uptick since 2022". Demand is forecast to rise to 225 in 2024.

Just under half of those in secure residences are aged 16-19 and three quarters of the youth justice residence population identify as Māori. Many have mental health challenges.

"...there appears to be a greater proportion of youth crime committed by so-called ‘life-course persistent’ criminals: chronic offenders whose anti-social behaviour is rooted in an early childhood of trauma and abuse, and who offend well into adulthood. This is a group whose offending is more entrenched and at the severe end of the spectrum."

Children and youth of different age cohorts - and reasons for admission - are getting mixed despite the practice being one that "should be avoided at all costs."

Staff are relatively unskilled in respect of the complex resident needs they face. Many are low-skilled and unqualified youth workers. They are "often left to interpret policies or make up processes and standard operating procedures for themselves." Their work environments are "dangerous". Bullying and harassment - which appears to not only flow between staff, but between staff and residents - is relatively common. The staffing structures are overly hierarchical with too much middle-management. The physical residences themselves are "tired" despite having been purpose built in the 1990s and early 2000s.

Some safety issues are created by legislation, for instance, "Because regulation prevents rangatahi from being locked in their rooms at night, children in a wing or dormitory can move between rooms if they want to (or are threatened). Along with blind spots, this creates an environment at high risk for sexual violence, assault, nighttime escapes and grooming in regard to gangs or higher end offending." Lack of radios, poor wi-fi, security camera blind-spots, old-fashioned keys, and smuggled contraband all contributed to increased danger for staff and residents.

All in all the residences feature a lack of leadership, clarity of purpose, transparency, accountability, trust, and fear of retaliation. The report paints a bleak picture.

Oranga Tamariki was established in 2017 and there have been several reviews since: "Taken together, the litany of reviews makes for confronting reading. They paint a picture of poor agency and system performance, sometimes at odds with Oranga Tamariki’s core mission of being child centred in all it does."

The current review is no less confronting. Middle-management are fatigued by the reviews and have lost faith. “Oranga Tamariki only ever reacts”, said one respondent, “and then generally in an ad hoc and panicked fashion.” “There is no time to embed changes”, said another, “because there is never a considered implementation plan, showing how all the pieces fit together.” Front-line staff are described as "overwhelmed by the constant parade of reviewers." One worker describes how the constant change is "... exhausting and, frankly, it's cynicism inducing."

In the last two years all Youth Justice residences have moved to adopt Māori values working in collaboration with Māori academics and Māori practitioners. There does not appear to be any direct criticism of this approach but the reviewers insist, " Ideologies, catch phrases and lists of projects are not a substitute for a properly considered strategy, operating model and outcomes framework for the secure residences and community home portfolio." A comprehensive reset is called for.

The many recommendations all sound energetic and purposeful but are far too numerous to summarise. I am afraid I got weary reading about what the reset would require and found myself sympathising deeply with those who will be tasked with its implementation. Once more into the breech.

Perhaps though this singular list of failure is just one of many that a new government will have to confront. In the following summation 'Oranga Tamariki' could reasonably be substituted with other public agency names:

"...Oranga Tamariki has lost trust and confidence: the trust of many in the community, of other agencies, of its tamariki and rangatahi, and in some cases, of its own staff."