Real Issues No. 343 - Child abuse, EU Elections, Tiananmen

Maxim Institute - Real Issues - No. 343 11 June 2009 www.maxim.org.nz

Time for action On the fringe Tiananmen: 20 years on

IN THE NEWS NCEA confusion for parents 'Private choices, public costs'

TIME FOR ACTION It will be news to no-one that New Zealand's family violence problem is acute. Yet this is news that we must not get used to hearing. A new review published by the Office of the Children's Commissioner should be a catalyst for some genuine soul-searching about who is most at risk, and what we can do to help them. According to the review, risk factors which increase the likelihood of a child suffering 'fatal assault or serious injury' before their fifth birthday, include children living with 'non-biological' fathers, a background of domestic violence, 'mental illness,' 'alcohol and drug abuse,' poverty and the ethnicity of the child. It confronts us with an uncomfortable statistic: 'In New Zealand, Maori ethnicity is a static risk factor' associated with a six-fold greater risk for male children and a three-fold greater risk for female children. Higher risks are also associated with mothers who are young and have a low level of education. The review notes that 'identified risk factors seldom occur in isolation,' with the families at greatest risk ticking more than one of these boxes. Being honest about the risk factors will only go so far if we are not also willing to examine, evaluate and critique the efficacy of interventions, as the second half of the review begins to do. It identifies home visitation and parent training programmes as helpful responses to the issue of abuse. These programmes involve professionals working with families to connect them with vital services and improve their parenting. The report notes that these programmes are effective for some families, particularly when relationships with workers are strong and persistent, and when a 'broad range of needs' is addressed. 'Case co-ordination' between agencies is also vital--the same families continually pop up in a variety of contexts, but the co-ordination and communication between agencies is often lacking. While the Commissioner's chief response to the report was to call for funding for a 'shaken baby prevention programme,' our response needs to be broader than that. It needs to address all the causes of death and the range of effective interventions that the report outlines. The review offers a thumbnail sketch of the work we need to do: identifying risk factors and their inter-relationships, evaluating interventions to see if and how they work, having the political and moral courage to face the truth about family violence. It might not be fashionable to say, for example, that the data on 'non-biological' fathers casts doubt on the popular embrace of the idea of 'blended' families, but without the will to put the information we have to work, nothing is likely to change. The good news is that the report identifies real and helpful action–action that we can take now.

Read 'Death and Serious Injury from assault of children aged under 5 years in Aotearoa New Zealand: A review of international literature and recent findings, June 2009.' http://www.occ.org.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/6343/OCC_Deathand_seriousinjury2009_040609.pdf

ON THE FRINGE This week's European elections have let loose a political earthquake, with centre-right and hard-line fringe parties attracting support across Europe. In the United Kingdom, driven by low voter turnout and fury over economic stagnation, expense scandals and corruption, the 'ultra-nationalist' British National Party took two seats in the troubled North. In the UK, just 34 percent cast their votes, with traditional Labour supporters either staying home or swinging to the BNP, delivering Labour a record low 15 percent of the vote, beaten by the Conservatives and the Euro-sceptic UK Independence Party. The low turnout, together with the rise of extreme and radical voices like the BNP, brings into sharp focus the fragility of the democratic process. Why would such parties attract this support? Democracy is based on a relationship of trust--a sense that the people we elect to govern us make laws for all, for the common good. When the political process is seen as corrupt or unresponsive, and politicians as self-serving hacks, then democracy is in trouble, as we see in the United Kingdom. Parties like the British National Party provide a home for repugnant racism and thuggery. But at the same time, the mainstream parties should ask themselves why the BNP's message resonates. The description made by BNP's Nick Griffin, of Britain as a 'bankrupt slum,' and his unabashed advocacy for Britishness, strikes a chord with many people who are concerned about immigration and cohesion, disconnected from the mainstream, distrustful of politics and angry about the direction of the country. The success of the BNP is the failure of the mainstream parties, both Labour and the Conservatives. It shows an erosion of trust--the vital currency of democracy. On their watch, concerns have grown about immigration, employment, cohesion and identity. People have become disengaged. To paraphrase Roger Scruton, laws fail to work when 'we' becomes 'they,' as in 'they'll do what they like' and 'they're at it again.' Bringing people back into the process and away from the fringe will require listening to public anger rather than discounting it. It will require creative and courageous solutions to social disconnection. And it requires a trust in the people, in their communities and institutions. It is these things that bring people in from the fringe, and yoke them into a wider fabric of belonging. It is these things which will strangle the ugly spectre of racism and bigotry.

Read the EU election result http://www.elections2009-results.eu/en/united_kingdom_en.html#ancre4

TIANANMEN: 20 YEARS ON Twenty years have now passed since Tiananmen Square--an event that grieved the watching world. It is important for us to observe this anniversary, and remember what it tells us about how crucial and precious our freedom is.

Discovering exactly what happened on June 4 1989, in Tiananmen Square Beijing, is difficult--reports varied both at the time and in the years that have followed. It is known that it was the culmination of a protest that started almost two months earlier, as a public mourning over the death of Hu Yaobang, a former Secretary General in the Communist Party. He had been pushed to resign two years previous because of his open criticisms of the Party. The mourning of Hu Yaobang became a rallying point for Beijing students to protest for democracy and against corruption, with growing numbers joining marches around the city and occupying Tiananmen Square in a giant sit-in. The government controlled media published front page criticisms of the marches, and people from cities throughout China travelled to join the protest. By the beginning of June the numbers in the square were reportedly up to one million. On the night of June 3rd, the People's Liberation Army of China moved in to disperse the crowds, and journalists reported seeing soldiers 'repeatedly firing their machine guns at civilians, even those who were fleeing.' Chaos ensued as protestors fled the square, many gunned down. Famous footage of a single student standing in front of a tank was beamed to television screens around the world. In the last 20 years, there have been ongoing reports of the Chinese government closing down this part of their history. The Economist recently described China's memory of Tiananmen Square as a 'muddled and half-forgotten tale.' The actual number of deaths from the crackdown will likely never be known, with figures differing wildly, from several hundred civilian casualties, to over three thousand. Even without being certain of all the details, this landmark day remains significant and the fact that a government so violently shut down the voices of its own people, must be remembered. In our open and democratic society, it is easy to take for granted the freedom to speak, to gather in a public place and to demonstrate for a cause we believe in. We enjoy equality before the law and representation from elected Members of Parliament. This freedom is not inevitable, it is something to be treasured. Remembering Tiananmen Square ought to urge us to appreciate and safe-guard our freedom. To make the most of our ability to speak, to gather, to live without fear of a totalitarian government. By being informed and active members of our own nation, we uphold the memory of those who stood for such rights, 20 years ago.

IN THE NEWS NCEA CONFUSING FOR PARENTS New research by Dr Elizabeth McKinley shows that some parents--particularly those in Maori and Pacific families--struggle to decipher the NCEA system, making them reticent about advising their children on what school subjects to take. This is a concern because some students are already choosing subjects that do not hold enough credits to enable them to participate in tertiary education, and so it is important that parents understand how the system works. The system was designed to be more flexible but it is a double-edged sword--while students now have more choice about what subjects they take, its wide scope makes the system complex and difficult to understand. This report suggests a pressing need for NZQA to look at the way they inform communities about the details of NCEA. Read 'Towards University: Navigating NCEA Course Choices in Low-Mid Decile Schools' http://www.starpath.auckland.ac.nz/uoa/fms/default/starpath/research/docs/Towards%20university%20-%20Navigating%20NCEA%20course%20choices%20in%20low-mid%20decile%20schools.pdf

'PRIVATE CHOICES, PUBLIC COSTS' A report from the Institute of Marriage and Family in Canada has outlined the financial costs associated with family breakdown, estimating that almost seven billion dollars is spent annually in Canada, as a result of broken families. These costs come through money spent on court and legal fees, and through government transfers like welfare. The report also finds that child poverty is often connected to family structure stating 'subsequent to a marriage or relationship ending, women and children are significantly more likely to fall into poverty than those in intact families, even when we control for socioeconomic status.' This report is similar to 'The Value of Family,' a report released in New Zealand last year that looked at financial costs of family breakdown in New Zealand. Read 'Private Choices, Public Costs' http://www.imfcanada.org/article_files/Cost%20of%20Family%20Breakdown%20finalHR.pdf

Read 'The Value of Family' http://www.familyfirst.org.nz/files/NZ%20REPORT%20The%20Value%20of%20Family.pdf

TALKING POINT

'The most effective way to destroy a people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history.' George Orwell

A registered charitable trust, funded by donations, Maxim Institute values your interest and support.

Click here to find out how you can support Maxim Institute (http://www.maxim.org.nz/index.cfm/About_us/Support_us)

Maxim Institute's regular email publication, Real Issues, provides thought-provoking analysis of developments in policy and culture in New Zealand and around the world.

ENDS

© Scoop Media