Aotearoa – 2019 Social work blog 413 /713

They come and take our jobs!!… But they are ‘us’

By Moto Moto

Aotearoa New Zealand is an island country in the southwestern Pacific Ocean whose culture has been influenced by the unique milieu and the geographic isolation of the surrounding islands but of these, more so from the indigenous Māori people. However, at its essence it is really western culture and as an effect of the British colonization the country also includes multi-ethnic migration groups. As, a result of this admixture of cultures many New Zealanders have a positive perception on immigration. They feel that it makes the island a more interesting place to live due to the diversity of culture, food, music etc. It is a beneficial for the economy as some immigrants have higher education and qualifications, thus they help fill job shortages in certain industries. However, not everyone believes it is a positive as they hold the notion that immigrants are stealing jobs and making it harder for New Zealanders to be employed.

As a New Zealand immigrant myself, a phrase I am all too familiar with (along with many others) is; ‘all they do is come to our country and take our jobs.’ Before I continue onto my next point, I just want you to think about this; how does someone come and take an opportunity that everyone had access to?

In 2007, there was a shortage of technicians in New Zealand and my father and his colleagues were recruited to come from Zimbabwe as they were qualified technicians. Initially they had to leave behind wives, children, their social life; basically everything they knew in hopes of a stable and improved future.

Upon coming to New Zealand, my father and his colleagues had to go through a challenging process of looking for affordable housing and adjusting to change of culture and environment. I remember him mentioning how he had a frustrating encounter with a European New Zealand male who accused of him “stealing his job” and urged him to “go back where he came from.” I really felt the gravity of this phrase years into my studies and work when I would hear in passing, people complaining about “not having job opportunities because they are all taken by Indians and Chinese.” As an immigrant I would get frustrated because I struggled to understand how something could be taken from ‘them’ since we did not come here by force and insert ourselves in their country but were called here because they were in need. It was not until I familiarized myself with the term privilege . It is defined as “a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group”.

Because many New Zealanders attain privileges as a result of being citizens, they have feelings about immigrants in terms of how these privileges are affected. One might be that they feel these people coming here do ‘not belong’ here, therefore they should not have the same access to opportunities as everyone else. Or two, that they feel as an effect of immigration they have lessened access to these privileges, which is probably the root of the employment issue. But perhaps such belief is rooted in reasoning influenced by racism and xenophobia. These people really believe that in a country like New Zealand in this day and age that immigration is increasing pressure on the country’s resources such as transportation, housing and education. Beliefs that are incomprehensible for someone such as me who has actually seen and experienced (and have many generations of family that have experienced) ‘actual’ lack of resources. In comparison it is a dream living in New Zealand compared to other places, immigrants come here to share in the opportunities not to steal jobs as we know what it like to not have or to struggle to have a little.

To conclude, maybe there is a real issue within the employment sector that needs to be discussed in relation to immigrants, however these toxic beliefs cannot be where we start that conversation. These negative views on immigration cause racial tension and division amongst people when there should be celebration that no matter where they are from, they can come live and work together. I believe there is a need for social workers to be able to navigate such issues through advocacy as it is described heart of social work by (ANZSW) . The question is – do social workers care enough to change the discourse around immigrants?

The gap getting bigger between the rich and the poor

By Nia Mafi

The country once known as the ‘land of milk and honey’ throughout the years has been anything but that. I have been one of the families whose has been a victim of the reality of poverty. As a child of a single parent in South Auckland I can attest to effects of poverty and my access to opportunities. I have witnessed and experienced food insecurities as a child as well being unable to access to educational opportunities. I have witnessed my mother struggling on the basic benefit to provide the staples for us her children. My mum struggled to meet our needs, and this affected her mental health as well as compromised my relationship with her.

However, in my research I have found that the sad truth is child poverty has increased tremendously within New Zealand affecting over 300,000 of our children and to understand this a bit better 45,000 more than a year ago (Guardian , 2019). To put this into perspective, the families and children who are most affected by poverty are identified as Maori and Pacific families. It is stated that there are many living below the 60% income poverty line. As a country, we need to address the issue of child poverty and support initiatives that alleviate the impact that the national and international policies have created over many generations. Many of these have become entrenched in our society which has an underlying colonialist values and beliefs and been supported with the concepts associated of neo-liberalist ideologies since 1980’s.

The statistics as provided by Counties Manukau District Health Board prove that the children and families who are as living in income poverty are at most risk of medical problems and mental health illnesses. The other issues for those affected by poverty are social exclusion and lower educational achievements which end up creating statistics that reflect this with the Ministry of Education. They live in unstable, poor-quality housing with the effect on the overall well-being of the family.

Food insecurity is caused by the lack of access to quality or quantity of nutritious food and the list goes on. All the effects of the child poverty have the capcity to widen the gap between the have and have nots. Speaking on this issue I come from a place of experience from my life; this has been my reality. Being raised in a one-parent home being the eldest alongside three other siblings residing in South Auckland, poverty was not an issue as poverty was our normal. Our normal was reflected throughout my neighbourhood, I could vividly recall times that dinner was two-minute noodles and white bread for 99c or five dollars-worth of hot chips from the nearest takeaways because it would feed us all. I was unaware that this was not the way everyone else lived until I got older and more socially diverse.

During my time as a 4^th Year Social Work student I have become more aware of the inequities in our society and the large gap between the very wealthy and the very poor. In my studies I have also discovered that this has been progressively happening over several generations as a direct result of policies and systems that have not supported growth for those that are most affected by poverty. In my opinion, after reading the Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) 205-page report and the 42 recommendations that were made, it is the time for action against child poverty for the future of New Zealand as a whole. It does need to be noted that the WEAG recommendations to date have been ignored and are yet to be a part of the action plan and strategy for this government.

Personally, I believe the policies and systems currently in place need to be adjusted to not only address child poverty but to actively engage with organisations and communities that are attempting to address the most obvious symptoms of poverty with the increase of homeless people and begging being everywhere. Overall though the effects of poverty can only be addressed when we a country work alongside each other and with the financial support of our government to help empower and facilitate change systemically.

Reference list:

https://www.health.govt.nz/new-zealand-health-system/my-dhb/counties-manukau-dhb/population-counties-manukau-dhb

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/aug/16/new-zealands-most-shameful-secret-we-have-normalised-child-poverty

http://www.weag.govt.nz/assets/documents/WEAG-report/aed960c3ce/WEAG-Report.pdf

“Don’t Worry, they’re always like that” – Responding to family violence

By Chade95

Have you ever overheard your neighbours screaming at each other in the middle of the night? If so, how did you react to it? Did you think that it was concerning and needed some form of intervention or did you think that it was annoying to be hearing their ‘private business’? Family violence in Aotearoa New Zealand continues to grow at a staggering rate, impacting the lived lives of all New Zealanders whether directly through the physical experience or indirectly through the changes of law and policy. Studies have shown that in New Zealand you are more likely to experience family violence at least once in your lifetime than not, with the likelihood of experiencing family violence increasing depending on the individual’s socio-economic status. In 2017 alone there were approximately 118,000 reports of concern made to police about family violence situations, this number making up less that 30% of the overall incidents of family violence in the country. With such high rates of family violence, there is an increase in demand for services and interventions to address the high rates of FV, leading to a staggering eight-billion-dollar expense on the economy, which still is not enough to make a significant difference in FV (NZFVC, 2017).

Since the release of the Domestic Violence Act 1995, family violence has been recognised to be instances that involve physical abuse, sexual abuse, psychological abuse, financial abuse, elder abuse and neglect, with all forms being punishable by law ( 2000). The DVA 1995 brought about a significant change, with a social shift moving community members away from the acceptance of FV to an intolerance of it within their community, however this shift was focused more primarily on visible signs of abuse. In society today, most community members take a stance of intolerance when it comes to FV, with an espoused belief that if they were to witness family violence, they would intervene whether directly or indirectly. When cases of family violence are reported to police, it is often because the abuse has increased to a significant degree where victims and observers agree that there is a need for intervention. These significant instances are most commonly associated to episodes of physical abuse, sexual abuse and neglect which further serve to make up the less that 30% of reported instances on family violence in New Zealand. This leads to the question, why is over 70% of incidents going unreported in New Zealand?

Responding to family violence is easier said than done. As a social work student and a person with historical trauma around family violence, I have always thought myself to be someone with zero tolerance for family violence. I have seen it in my family, I have seen it in my friends, I have seen it in my workplace and have thought, I want to make a change. However, what I saw was not the start, what I saw were visible examples of abuse. I missed the signs of alienation from my family, I missed the signs of absence from my friends, I missed the signs of isolation from my colleagues, which lead me to question, ‘how could I miss these changes with the people I spend my days with?’ I realised I have a massive blind spot to family violence. My open self looks to advocate for change in family violence on a significant level, my hidden self looks to take a more ‘aggressive approach’ to ending family violence, whereas my blind spot is more indifferent. What I was unaware of was my own conceptualisations of FV, which recognised only instances of visible abuse, ignoring precursor signs such as being woken up in the night to my neighbours screaming at each other in their home. I was unaware of my own biases and perceptions that promoted FV, until I had friends visiting who overheard my neighbours fighting. “Don’t worry, they’re always like that… Just ignore it” is what I told her. I had minimised the whole experience and shamed it publicly. I, who espoused beliefs of advocating for FV, turned my back on cases in my immediate surroundings, as it was embarrassing for me to be associated to these situations. It was my unknown self that adopted beliefs that family violence is a private issue, that what happens in one’s home is nobody’s business (Levin, 2016).

Through reflection, the experience of identifying my underlying prejudices about family violence has been both shocking and educating, as it helped me to explore this ingrained thought pattern that justified family violence. By identifying my underlying thought patterns, it made me more aware to the big challenge of ending family violence in Aotearoa New Zealand, as change will need to be made on an individual and structural level, changing the way people think and respond to violence. Changing behaviours that promote violence in the home, and challenging powers that continue to promote to support the idea of family violence being a ‘private issue’.

References:

Levin, M (2016) How to Build More Self-Awareness & a Stronger Culture Using the Johari Window, Successful culture international, Retrieved from; https://www.successfulculture.com/build-more-self-awareness-stronger-culture-using-johari-window

Barwick, h., Gray, A., Macky, R. (2000), DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ACT 1995

Process Evaluation, Ministry of Jusice, Retrieved from;

https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/domestic.pdf

New Zealand Family Violence Clearinghouse (2017), Data Summaries 2017: Snapshot, Retrieved from; https://nzfvc.org.nz/sites/nzfvc.org.nz/files/Data-summaries-snapshot-2017.pdf

Euthanasia – are we well informed?

By Penzil Trigger warning, sensitive topic

Euthanasia is the choice of a person who is terminally ill to terminate their life and alleviate the suffering, it is legal in some countries and illegal in others. In New Zealand, Euthanasia is against the law, where it is illegal to assist anyone to end their life. However, debate and controversy has escalated with David Seymour’s, End of Life Choice Bill to Parliament, which was lodged on 08 June 2017. The Bill is based on the Canadian model of Euthanasia laws, which includes allowing of euthanasia for persons that live with physical or psychological suffering.

The most vulnerable in our society are the ones whose voices we need to hear and for many here in New Zealand, suffered quietly and ended their own lives at the hand of suicide. Of the world’s most developed countries, New Zealand has the highest death rate for teenagers and young people, suicide rates continue to increase , with approximately 500 death by suicide a year. Our elderly and disabled within our communities continue to be marginalised and where the State need to acknowledge that resources for the health sector should be reflected in the needs of our most vulnerable groups as well as the professionals that support them. It is disturbing to see the recently published statistics of euthanasia in Belgium, which reported 14,753 individuals between 2002 (when Belgium decriminalized euthanasia) and 2016, from Belgium’s Federal Commission on the Control and Evaluation of Euthanasia. Belgium’s liberal laws around euthanasia raises global concerns where they have allowed legislation that supports euthanasia of minors, the only country in the world to do so. There have been recent calls by Belgian mental health professionals to ban euthanasia of the mentally ill, such as those with depression or behavioural disorders that are medically termed “non-terminally ill”, conditions which are common with New Zealand’s elderly population, where they may be vulnerable to coercion.

The moral and ethical dilemmas that are associated with Euthanasia are compounded with information from various sources that affect the public, health practitioners, professionals and politicians. The circumstances and capacity of each individual person is one of many elements to Seymour’s proposed bill, prompted by the highly publicised case of Lecretia Seales and her battle with brain tumour and consequential events that saw her challenge New Zealand law in court, for her right to assisted dying.

For many health practitioners and professionals, involvement in the process of assisted dying will undoubtedly have moral implications if legalised, e.g. doctors who hold a belief that their duty is to prolong life, for nurses who have religious beliefs and for social workers who may struggle with their personal views over advocating and supporting individuals who choose assisted dying compromising their code of conduct and support for the service user, their family members before and after the event. Other consequences to be considered are where family are in disagreement over the service user’s wishes, or in some instances, where the service user may not wish for family members to be aware of their choice for assisted dying, yet as social workers, we are bound by confidentiality. There are cultural aspects, where Maori tikanga from spiritual and sacred protocols as taonga (gifts) are not to be breached.

As social workers we are presented with many challenges, our own ethical values and our attitudes that define our practice, combined with policies and legislation that guide our practice, it is our duty in all circumstances that we promote quality of life and guard the most vulnerable in our communities. These are qualities of New Zealand that encapsulates the essence of compassion within Te Tiriti o Waitangi, to protect.

Where to get help:

• Lifeline: 0800 543 354 (available 24/7)

• Suicide Crisis Helpline: 0508 828 865 (0508 TAUTOKO) (available 24/7)

• Youth services: (06) 3555 906

• Youthline: 0800 376 633

• Kidsline: 0800 543 754 (available 24/7)

• Whatsup: 0800 942 8787 (1pm to 11pm)

• The Word

• Depression helpline: 0800 111 757 (available 24/7)

• Rainbow Youth: (09) 376 4155

• CASPER Suicide Prevention

If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111

Ministry of Health. (2019, January 16). Understanding suicide in New Zealand. Retrieved from https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/mental-health-and-addictions/working-prevent-suicide/understanding-suicide-new-zealand

Vigilant social work for those who cannot speak for themselves

By Yedidyah

It is a well-known fact that New Zealand scores one of the worst rates of child abuse in the developed world. Child abuse is not only limited to physical and sexual abuse, but also includes a wide range of acts of harm that threatens children’s wellbeing such as psychological abuse, neglect, and maltreatment (Montgomery, Just-Østergaard & Jervelund, 2019). This uncomfortable reality has been alerting both the public and us, social workers. However, the shocking news released on media last month made me question whether we are being vigilant enough to provide the needed care for our children.

The New Zealand Herald reported a dreadful incident of toddler’s death. Wiggins (2019) informed that a 16-month-old was noticed with a number of unexplained injuries after his visits to hospitals for a broken leg. But the medical professionals involved did not document the possibility of non-accidental injury early enough for investigation, and the toddler was found dead with further injuries after being discharged from hospital. The tragedy of this death is that a number of professionals involved had suspected the abuse but did not report or escalate it. They had the needed information and opportunities to prevent it from happening, but the lack of vigilance led to the loss of young innocent life.

However, the 2018 Oranga Tamariki Annual Report informed a decrease in the number of substantiated child abuse (Oranga Tamariki, 2018). But what’s interesting is that the overall reports of concern remained stable, which revealed a significant imbalance between the notifications and the assessments they undertook for substantiation. Keddell (2019) highlighted in her blog post on child protection that this disproportion is due to the high threshold for the investigations to take place for the categorisation of incidents. So the reduction in substantiated abuse might not mean the true reduction in child abuse. Rather, it might mean that the system is abusing and marginalising the children of unaccepted incidents, marking their life-threatening experiences insignificant.

The reality we face emphasises the professionals’ lack of attentiveness in measuring the safe environment for vulnerable children. I want to raise awareness on this very serious problem because the human service practitioners who are supposed to fight against abuse seem to be doing it themselves. If we are neglecting children’s needs for survival, aren’t we the perpetrators of child abuse?

I’m not here to criticise anyone because I’ve done the same. I was volunteering at an orphanage in Thailand, when a boy, seemingly a six-year-old or seven, has approached me. The boy gained my attention by poking my waist. I said hi and asked his name but he didn’t reply back. Instead, he sat down and wrote something on the muddy ground, and looked back at me. I couldn’t understand because it was in Thai so I asked him what it is but he just quietly stared at me. Soon after, he just walked away, still without a word spoken. Later on, I found out from a youth worker there that the boy was sexually abused at a young age and as the impact of the trauma he lost how to speak: aphasia.

The boy could not speak. But he still approached me first, asked for my attention, and tried to tell me something in his own way of communication. But my insensibility failed his attempt.

What breaks my heart the most is that the toddler in the news article and the boy I met in Thailand were unable to speak for themselves. A caregiver who took a maltreated 20-month-old baby in said that “As she was a baby during this time, she can’t tell us about her experience… defenceless and unable to protect herself from her parents’ inadequate care” (Graham, 12 May 2019). Aren’t children the most vulnerable beings of this hierarchical society governed by power, especially because they’re unable to defend themselves? Social workers must not trespass the small signs and be more conscious, alerted, vigilant, and strengthen our sensibility towards the vulnerable children’s voice to enhance their wellbeing.

I want to stand up and speak out for those who are unable to speak for themselves. That is the very identity of my being as a social worker. Would you be a part?

References

Graham, B. (2019, 12 May). Carer lays bare the tragic long-term impact of vegan parents’ neglect on their baby. New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=12230163

Keddell, E. (2019, May 10). Hard to get into, but harder to get out of: Understanding recent trends in child protection [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginingsocialwork.nz/2019/05/hard-to-get-into-but-harder-to-get-out-of-understanding-recent-trends-in-child-protection/

Montgomery, E., Just-Østergaard, E., & Jervelund, S. S. (2019). Transmitting trauma: A systematic review of the risk of child abuse perpetrated by parents exposed to traumatic events. International Journal of Public Health, 64(2), 241-251.

Oranga Tamariki. (2018). Oranga Tamariki annual report 2017/2018. Wellington, New Zealand: Author. Retrieved from https://www.orangatamariki.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Publications/Annual-Report/Oranga-Tamariki-Annual-Report-2018.pdf

Wiggins, A. (2019, 6 May). Three doctors ignored suspected abuse before toddler’s death. New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12228313

Oranga Tamariki: Māori in name alone?

By NJV

Oranga Tamariki hails a Māori name and publicly displays Māori values. It is safe to assume this change of name and restructuring of the organisation reflects the high volume of Māori currently in state care. Perhaps it is public display of their commitment to working with Māori whānau in a culturally sensitive and inclusive manner. However, a harsh interpretation may see it as merely a tokenistic attempt to ‘save face’ in the eyes of the public, due to the lack of child protection system and policy that reinforces a truly bicultural and inclusive approach to working with whānau.

The Expert Panel Final Report has underpinned the restructuring of ‘Child Youth and Family’ to ‘Oranga Tamariki’. The Panel outlined their aspirations for Māori; reducing the cost afflicted on the state by Māori is at the forefront of these aspirations. The Panel briefly discuss the strengths of iwi, and the importance of whānau and cultural identity, but fail to offer recommendations that offer holistic support for whānau. They suggest a child-centred approach that focuses on the needs and safety of the child, and encourage the rescuing of children from parents who tick the risk boxes to save ‘future financial liability’. This approach is reflected in the 33% increase in Māori children being uplifted between 2015 and 2018 (Keddell, 2019). The Panel’s interests in saving money is evident, and they seem to ignore the serious harm that is caused by uplifting children. Not only the harm to the child, but to the whānau. The Panel encourage the voice of children in their recommendations, which is commendable, but where are the voices of our Māori whānau? What are their needs? How can we support them?

The disadvantages Māori face and the impact these have on their ability to provide safe and loving homes for their children is overlooked in the Panel’s final report. Hyslop (2018) illustrates the importance of developing an empathic understanding of how the pressures of poverty impact people’s capacity to parent. Living on a benefit that barely covers the essentials and living in overcrowded or inadequate housing with no assurance that it will be a long term living situation creates a stressful environment for parents. Furthermore, Māori face the ongoing impact of systemic racism and colonisation. Regardless of these external issues, the tone of the Expert Panel’s recommendations is “let’s help these people help themselves”. While I acknowledge that there are undeniable strengths in empowering people, we have found ourselves at a point where change must also occur at a structural level for a significant improvement in Māori wellbeing.

Being Māori myself, it is hard to look beyond the flaws in The Expert Panel’s Final Report that fail my people, who will continue to suffer from past structural and social failures. Since the restructuring, the number of Māori children uplifted has increased. There is a heavy focus on assessing risk and creating a care system that is well resourced and supports children in state care. I believe there needs to be a shift in focus and funding that supports Māori whānau not only before their children are uplifted, but also afterwards. Māori struggle to get their children back, and there is a lack of support in them doing so. I am certainly not saying that uplifting children is never necessary, because I understand that it is, and I have experienced situations where it was the best option. However, uplifting Māori children and placing them into a loving foster home should not be the end-game. Creating a well-resourced and supported home environment so they can continue a safe upbringing with their whānau should be. I will respect the display of Māori values when Oranga Tamariki adopts a child protection system, and our government implements policies that reflect a genuine dedication to upholding these values, and above all, upholding the mana of my people.

He aha te mea nui o te ao?
Ko te whānau

References

Hyslop, I. (2018, April 14). How about building a socially just child protection system? [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://www.reimaginingsocialwork.nz/2018/04/how-about-building-a-socially-just-child-protection-system/

Expert Advisory Panel (2015). Modernising Child, Youth and Family– Final Report. Wellington, NZ: NZ Govt. https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/corporate/expert-panel-cyf/investing-in-children-report.pdf

Representation of Māori through media

By Brooke Royal

Māori to me is whānau; iwi, my land, my ancestors and my blood connections. Māori to others are unemployed gang members who have a drug and alcohol problem, who live off the benefit and beat their Mrs. because she didn’t make him eggs. When I think of Māori, I think of my loving whānau who work their butts off and live good lives, but the next person may look at my whānau and think of them as nothing but a suspect off Police Ten 7, as the suspect was of Māori descent.

Most people living in Aotearoa will enjoy their Thursday evenings watching Police Ten 7 and laughing with disgrace. Yet, have we noticed that they are describing most suspects as of Māori descent? Is it because of their darker complexion, particular tattoos, bigger build or that they were wearing a hoodie that makes them Māori? If this hasn’t sparked a light bulb in your head, how about Jake the Muss from Once Were Warriors? I personally believe that this is an awesome movie however the picture it paints in the minds of non-Māori is the wrong way Māori need to be represented. Police Ten 7 and Once Were Warriors are extremely popular across Aotearoa, but they are representing Māori as nothing but criminals, gang members, unemployed alcoholics who have multiple children and live in poverty. Another example of this discrimination toward Māori is through news articles. A recent article written by NZ Herald (2019) discussed how tobacco, alcohol and gambling tax is costing Māori over $1 billion a year. Throughout the article, they continued to compare Māori to European New Zealanders, and each time Māori were portrayed as the minority between the two.

“The Māori adult (15 years and over) population of 517,000 was less than one fifth of the European/Other population of 2.8m, but Māori tobacco consumption made up just under half (45%) of European/Other tobacco expenditure” (NZ Herald, 2019). Representations of Māori, and our stories, remain under the control of Pākehā-owned television, radio, and print media (Aoake, 2017). Discrimination toward Māori through the media continues to happen time and time again, that so many of us have become blind to the intolerance.

It has been 179 years since Te Tiriti o Waitangi was created and signed, and to this day Māori are still discriminated against. The Ministry of Health (2012) identified that Māori adults were almost twice as likely as non-Māori adults to have experienced any type of racial discrimination. Following this, Māori adults were almost three times as likely as non-Māori adults to have experienced any unfair treatment on the basis of ethnicity. Within the social work profession Māori are the most dominant ethnicity group we will work with, and as a Māori myself I know that there is a lot of whakamā that comes with seeking help or being told that you need help. This whakamā that Māori feel is the baggage we hold realising that we are a minority in our own country and on our own land. On the other hand, the whakamā Māori are living with will also be what prevents them reaching out for support when they are vulnerable. As social workers, we need to take into consideration how this ethnic group is treated and also portrayed within our communities and through our media, and how this may impact their overall wellbeing. For Māori, mainstream media is mired in colonial framing, misrepresentation and exclusion – yet mainstream media continues to insist its coverage is non-partisan (Aoake, 2017). []

The representation of Māori being portrayed through media is only contributing to the racial discrimination this ethnic group already receives. The whakamā Māori carry due to being marginalised in their own country will only worsen if media continue to drag them through the mud. My concerns with this is around the future for our Māori whanau, and the racial discrimination and whakamā our people are holding, potentially preventing them from reaching out for help when they are vulnerable.

Naku te rourou nau te rourou ka ora ai te iwi.
With your basket and my basket, the people will live.

Aoake, M. (2017, 14 August) Metiria Turei and how the NZ media ignores its own prejudice. Vice. Retrieved from https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/ywwdpv/metiria-turei-and-how-the-nz-media-ignores-its-own-prejudice

Ministry of Health. (2012). Racial discrimination. Retrieved June 2, 2019, from https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/populations/maori-health/tatau-kahukura-maori-health-statistics/nga-awe-o-te-hauora-socioeconomic-determinants-health/racial-discrimination

Tobacco, alcohol and gambling tax costing māori over $1b a year (2019, May 13), New Zealand Herald, Retrieved from https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12230415

Allyship 101: An Open Letter to Mr Potato

by Abbey Harrison

“It’s PC gone mad! What if I decided I identify as a potato?! I am going to be personally offended by any individuals who don’t refer to me as ‘Mr. Potato’ from now on!!”

I immediately ran through what my plan of attack was going to be in this situation. I was at work, and the man loudly expressing his eye-roll inducing opinion was a customer. I didn’t want to cause too much of a scene for fear of getting in trouble with my company. But, there I was, a cis-gender, heterosexual, white, middle-class woman who knew that it was my responsibility to be an ally to my queer peers/colleagues/neighbours/fellow Kiwis. So, I said what I could without getting in trouble; “Um, I mean, I don’t think the queer community are choosing to be who they are, I think they just are that way. I think that, maybe, humans are just much more complex than how we’ve been treating them”. From what I can recall, he didn’t have much to say to that, just muttered something about snowflakes and walked out.

As a social work student, I like to try to understand an individual’s perspective. Even though I know that there are many people in the world who have similar opinions to this man, I hadn’t spent a lot of time trying to get into their mindset. Is it tall poppy syndrome? Fear of change? Feeling behind the times? All of the above? Regardless, no matter how hard I tried to understand Mr. Potato’s perspective, I couldn’t help but think about the plight of the LGBTQIA+/Rainbow community in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

The statistics show us that one in every five students who identified their sexuality as non-heterosexual reported being bullied at school on at least a weekly basis. They also show that in 2012 almost half of queer youth in Aotearoa had seriously considered attempting suicide, and that 1-in-5 had actually attempted to take their own life. In a country where we were so quick to declare “this is not our NZ” in the wake of the Christchurch tragedy, it is astounding to me that these statistics are going unnoticed or ignored by wider New Zealand society.

In 2019 New Zealand it is simply unacceptable to be contributing to these horrifying statistics by erasing or invalidating the identities and lived experiences of our LGBTQIA+ whānau. By making jokes about the ‘identity alphabet’, sexuality preferences, or ‘snowflakes’ you are contributing to the discourse that the nuances and subtleties of a person’s personal identity are either unimportant or non-existent.

What do we, as humans, have to lose by making other humans feel respected, validated, and comfortable?

There are hundreds upon hundreds of incredible resources at our fingertips. These resources break down any questions someone may have about the LGBTQIA+ experience; from the differences between sex, gender identity, and gender expression, to the spectrum of sexual orientations and their meanings. People like Ash Hardell dedicate their lives to education around the LGBTQIA+ community (I highly recommend their ‘ABCs of LGBT’ series as a starting point!) Or, if you are looking for something closer to home, Rainbow Youth NZ designed the incredible ‘Inside Out’ for in-school education, but is really helpful in laying out the ins and outs of the LGBTQIA+ community and how we can better facilitate a rainbow-friendly community in very practical (and easy!) ways.

So, Mr Potato stick on your plastic ears and listen to me. Every human deserves to have their identity properly recognised and respected. If you don’t understand it, that’s okay, but please take my advice and educate yourself. We are all still learning, it is a never-ending process. But deliberate ignorance is no longer acceptable, it is time to treat people with the respect that you expect to be afforded to you.

References:

Ash Hardell. (2019, 5 June). Home [Ash Hardell]. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/user/HeyThere005/videos

Harris, S. (2017, 2 August). Break The Silence: Rainbow suicide rate five times higher than mainstream. New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11896922

Inside Out, Rainbow Youth. (Accessed on: 2019, 5 June). How to Use Inside Out for Teachers and Youth Workers. Rainbow Youth. Retrieved from: https://insideout.ry.org.nz/

New Zealand Family Planning. (2018, 17 May). People of Diverse Genders and Sexualities More Likely to be Bullied. Retrieved from: https://www.familyplanning.org.nz/news/2018/people-of-diverse-genders-and-sexualities-more-likely-to-be-bullied

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: