The Green Paper for Vulnerable Children - Ministry of Social ...

This theme was raised by a large minority of community meetings, a minority of NGOs andother organisations, and to a lesser extent by frontline workers and the general public.It is essential to work in partnership with Pacific community groups, as there is a wealthof knowledge and expertise that the government can build upon. Culturally appropriateservices will be more likely to be delivered in a partnership model. (NGO)Working with other communities: Some submissions argued for working with othercultural communities who were not Māori or Pasifika; for example, refugees and immigrants.Again, these submissions recognised the importance of shared values or worldviews as a basisfor engaging and supporting families. This theme was raised by a small minority of submissionsacross all submitter types.Culture has a significant impact on human development and aspirations. Pasifika populationsand many of our new immigrant cultures are collective rather than individual, recognise futureand past generations and spirituality is central. Working with these populations requiresa bio-psycho-social-spiritual worldview, the priority of the collective over the individual,culturally appropriate evaluations and understanding there are other ways of knowingapart from research published in “esteemed publications” and conducted in waysdeemed legitimate by the publication. (NGO)Communities defined by common needs: Submissions argued for services and supports toaddress the needs of specific groups of families. These groups included teen parents, parentinga child with a disability, parenting while in prison, parenting while suffering physical or mentalill-health, or parenting in poverty. These submissions commonly argued services and supportsneed to be tailored to the particular concerns of families.Hard-to-reach communities (gangs) have within them a disproportionate number ofchildren who are vulnerable. Our experience proves that only viewing these groupsthrough a criminal justice lens only entrenches the vulnerability for their children.We have found that it is possible to have positive partnerships with members of thesegroups who support pro-social goals and that these partnerships are effective in helpingfoster positive changes in their attitudes and behaviours. This could not be achieved byan “outside” professional from any organisation. (NGO)Blaming communities: A small minority of submissions suggested the problem of vulnerablechildren lay with particular sorts of people or communities. These submissions argued theculture of that group is the problem rather than the solution. Groups who featured in thesekinds of arguments were Māori, DPB recipients, beneficiaries in general and absent fathers.A related theme was the argument that vulnerability has arisen from a breakdown in familyvalues, such as marriage, within communities.Use community sites to support families: Submissions suggested using venues wherepeople already meet and feel comfortable to deliver support. Suggested locations includedschools, marae and community centres. These submissions often argued for one-off initiatives;for example, delivering a parenting programme from a school. Other submissions argued forongoing services that are integral to the venue; for example, fruit in schools or free schoollunches. Submissions also suggested using venues as “hubs” or “one-stop shops”. This themewas supported by about half of community meetings and a large minority of submissions fromother organisations and NGOs. The general public were least likely to make this suggestion.Practice Changes Policy Changes Show Leadership Share Responsibility Children / Young People Executive SummaryThe Green Paper for Vulnerable Children Full Summary of Submissions69