Making a Difference for Children Children in Crisis Conference Dr Nicola Atwool, University of Otago 7 October 2013

Overview That state of the nation’s children ‘Vulnerable’ children What makes children vulnerable Making a difference Resilience Protective factors Implications of the White Paper Changes proposed Barriers to change

Definition of Vulnerability The stated aim of the Green Paper was that every child thrives, belongs, and achieves. Throughout the document, however, there was an emphasis on vulnerable children without that ever being defined For example the Green Paper noted that: 20% live in poverty 10% have a disability or significant health problem 20% of parents have a mental health issue 3.5% of parents have drug and alcohol issues 6,000 children have a significant behaviour problem by the time they go to school 5 – 10% of children aged between 3 and 17 develop conduct problems Between 10 and 24% of children report witnessing violence at home

Numbers of Vulnerable Children Yet the most frequently cited overall figure is 15% This suggests that not all children in the categories on the previous slide will be deemed vulnerable The figure of 15% is based on the two longitudinal studies undertaken in Christchurch and Dunedin The children in these studies were born at a time when the socio- economic context was very different. These are cities with relatively low Māori and Pacific populations and yet we know that they are over-represented in vulnerable populations This calls into question the accuracy of the 15% estimate

What is happening to children? Abuse and Neglect 2011/2012 CYF received 152,800 reports of concern 61,074 deemed to require further action 21,525 substantiated findings Out of home care 3,783 children in CYF out-of-home care (December 2012) UCB being paid for 11,899 children at June 2012 In 2011 Police recorded 12 homicides of children and young people under 20 by a family member

Neglect 4 in every 1,000 NZ children were identified by CYF as experiencing neglect in 2009 Sole maltreatment finding for 2 in 3 (63.1%) children with identified neglect 4 in 10 (41.7%) children with identified neglect were aged 0–4 in the year to June 2009 Māori children were 4.5 times and Pacific children 1.6 times more likely to have a finding of neglect compared to European/Other children

Sexual Abuse Between 1 in 3 and 1 in 5 women and 1 in 10 men report having experienced child sexual abuse In 2011 there were 1,856 reported sexual offences against a child under 16 years Under-reporting especially during childhood is a factor in estimating incidence and prevalence

Family Violence In 2012 there were 87,662 family violence investigations by NZ police 101,293 children were linked to these investigations In ,064 applications were made for Protection Orders In 2011 police recorded 11 homicides by an intimate partner, 9 of the victims were women, 2 were men 2011/12 Women’s Refuges affiliated to the National Collective received 85,794 crisis calls 8,930 women and 7,005 children accessed advocacy services 2,272 women and 1,424 children stayed in safe houses

Risk Factors Parental substance abuse Poor maternal mental health Poor parenting Poor infant attachment Recurrent child maltreatment Exposure to violence in the family Living in hardship Risk is cumulative

The State of the Nation’s Children Significant numbers of NZ children are exposed to multiple risk factors The impact is greatest in the first five years when the brain is developing Without intervention the impact may be life long Even lower levels of neglect significantly compromise development Negative outcomes are not inevitable

Resilience Resilience is not an isolated individual characteristic Develops in the face of adversity Positive stress promotes development as children gain mastery over challenges Tolerable stress – beyond child’s capacity to mange but can do so with adult support Toxic stress – strong and prolonged activation of body’s stress management system in the absence of parental support, damages the architecture of the brain, long-term impact Key to resilience Is the balance between risk factors and protective factors The more risk factors a child is exposed to, the more protective factors are needed to ensure resilience

Protective Factors Individual Attributes Family support: Community support: person or agency Cultural connection: Competence Self-esteem Autonomy Responsive parenting Consistency Guidance Belonging Mentoring/role modeling Achievement Belonging identity

The White Paper Signals the government’s intention to introduce a new approach designed to reduce child abuse and neglect. Emphasis is on early intervention to identify vulnerable children and provide supports Strong emphasis on community based approach and Joint responsibility and action across government to improve outcomes for children within target populations Has major implications for all government departments and non- government organisations working with children and families

Proposed Service Delivery

Implications for Universal Services Strong emphasis on early childhood education Increasing enrolments for Māori and Pasifika Beneficiaries now required to ensure children attend Increased demand for services compatible with parental employment Identified as part of the ‘workforce for children’ Critical role in identification of ‘vulnerable’ children Changes to information sharing processes Involvement in workforce development More likely to be involved in multi-agency plans Development of education providers as community hubs Co-location of services, especially health Active outreach to families to ensure engagement with other services

Challenges Ensuring an effective local response Making Children’s Team work Active participation in multi-disciplinary workforce development Communication and co-operation Breaking down the silos to facilitate a focus on the ‘whole child’ and Building respectful and effective relationships across government and non-government organisations at the local level Important to hold on to the vision of engaging with families to ensure they have the resources to meet the needs of their children Communities will have to be proactive to ensure that services are accessible and may have to find solutions when there are gaps

Barriers Government failure to adequately address the impact of poverty and inequality on children will limit efforts to reduce vulnerability Government and non-government services will need to embrace the notion of cross-sectoral responsibility and change patterns of behaviour that have led to abdication of responsibility for difficult children and families This also applies to front-line workers including those in education, health and welfare services Whenever we are tempted to shift responsibility: Upward to management or the government Sideways to colleagues or other services Downwards to families and/or children We need to ask ourselves what can I do to make a difference in this situation?