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:
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%)**
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."
Lindsay Mitchell is a welfare commentator who blogs HERE. - Where this article was sourced.
10 comments:
The stats show a very strong correlation between being on a benefit, particularly a single mother's benefit, and child abuse.
And yet again, part-Maori feature far higher than their proportion of the population.
Te Pati Maori, Labour & The Greens blame it on colonialism and make benefits easier to get, especially for Maori.
But the stats show that is exactly the problem.
Talk about digging an even bigger hole for yourself, and all those poor little abused kids, with your big woke, entitled shovel.
Yet another failed policy of "progressive" socialism, which only makes things worse and "progress" backwards.
The maori (colonial hater) cowboy is conspicuous by his lack of constructive comment.
Under the carpet it goes...
It's far from rocket science. We know most of our societal problems start in the home and single parent families on social welfare are clearly NZ's biggest problem in the arena of child abuse.
And what has this country done about it? It's allowed the finger to be pointed at colonisation and poverty, all the while incentivising more indiscriminate breeding, especially by a cohort that has a broken culture that lacks personal and societal responsibility.
Labour, the Greens and Te Pati Maori clearly have no answers and only want to further incentivise the situation. It's a national disgrace and it's way past time we 'grasped the nettle' and started to address the causes, rather than futile attempts to sort the problem at the bottom of the proverbial cliff.
No amount of money will work for the latter, so let's hope the next Minister will turn this appalling statistic around with some straight talking, basic education and counselling, and the disincentivising of the activities and culture that have created the problem.
Blaming poverty is a total cop out. Many were very hard up during the 1930s Depression but no great abuse problems. In the time of John A Lee's youth poverty worse still. The "maori to sort their own" supposed remedy involves further immersion in te ao and tikanga, with frequent haka to soften their violent instincts. It is often the latter and a confrontational attitude in general which results in many rendering themselves unemployable. The "maori sort themselves solution" involving for sure maori Labour and Te Pati adherent assistants, is not likely to vigorously advocate family planning.
Kevn - the cowboy hatted one has no interest in solving this problem. He is happy with the pain and death, it allows him to point the finger at the white colonialists and place the blame on their shoulders.
Maoris as failures is what he wants and needs, all so he can continue to have his snout deep in the money trough.
A wise Australian aborigine stated civil libertarians and their failure to condemn licentiousness were responsible for much of that countries neglect of abo. children.
Condemning sex outside a stable relationship and failing to take responsibility for your own offspring is oh so quaint and old fashioned- yet so relevant and pragmatic. The destruction of the traditional values of western culture have severely damaged native people.
So what to do? Some suggestions: 1. Disincentivize sole parenthood by a substantial stand down before paying a benefit, except in strict situations such as recent domestic violence proven beyond reasonable doubt. Many parent couples split because it's more lucrative than living on one minimum wage.
2. Provide incentives for families that stay together.
3. Restore respect men and fathers in law, fair due process and in media statements. For example, treat anti-male propaganda with the same responses as for other sexism, racism and religious hate speech.
Seems like teaching the skills required to build a committed marriage would make the biggest difference - not sex education. Two (committed) parent homes are what nurture and protect young children most - the data confirms this. The current benefit system does the opposite - it pays more lucratively and incentivises single parenthood which is a harder road is more highly associated with stress and poverty, child neglect, child abuse and child death. We need to focus our support as a country on building strong marriages - that’s how we build strong families.
Learning Self -control in children apparently is the main determining factor for success in life including an enduring marriage.. My own parents marriage was a bit of a battlefield yet they stayed together living parallel lives in the same home for the sake of the children and obvious economic reasons . They treated each other usually civilly as you should for anyone you interact with.
But where in our education system or society are people being encouraged to have self -control ? Don't do it you don't feel like it my children were told at school.
Another unexplained death of a baby in Papakura today. Police are investigating. The beating goes on. Shifting blame, justifying and denial are the tools of cowardly adults who kill at will. Name one other colonised nation that murders infants at the rate New Zealand does. No amount of kapahaka or cultural emersion is going to solve this one.
Post a Comment