No buddy like a sibling
Child welfare reformers have listened to the kids, and the changes could be political dynamite.
When my kids fight, which they sometimes do despite the fact that they know it’s a dagger to my heart, and more irritating than a mozzie in my ear at 3am, there’s no need for them to guess what the next words out of my mouth will be. ‘‘You’d better get on, because in the end your brother/sister may well be all you have.’’ I think I stole that from my mum; it feels like a phrase that’s been with me forever. I know I’ve been saying it to my two since they were first old enough to throw their Buzzy Bee pull-toys at each other. Siblings – can’t live with ‘em, can’t get rid of them permanently unless you’re North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, in which case all bets are off. I reckon there are heaps of people who secretly wish they could pull off something similar to the NCISstyle hit on his half-brother, Kim Jongnam, in the airport at Kuala Lumpur. Trick a couple of would-be actresses into knocking an older sibling off in broad daylight and get away with it? Sure! Mine’s badly allergic to dairy, fill your boots! But you can’t, can you? And neither should you. My mum’s right – for all the drama over the years, I know my two sisters are with me for the long haul. They have my back, and my history. We are spread over three different continents but we are there for each other the instant it’s needed. I love them to bits. That’s why I was not so surprised when Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft told me last week that siblings have turned out to be one of the most crucial pieces in the let’s-fix-Child, Youth and Family-forthe-final-time puzzle. Andrew used to be the face of the Youth Court; he ruled there for 15 years as Principal Youth Court Judge. Now he’s almost through his first year as commissioner. Andrew describes the CYF overhaul as a ‘‘once in a lifetime opportunity to put the past behind us and make change for the better’’. When the process began, Social Development Minister Anne Tolley asked the commission to go and find what children really think about how the system works for them. Surprisingly, through all the previous reviews, the child’s voice has remained entirely absent from the existing legislation.
He told me adults tend to think, ‘‘we know what the children would say, and we already know what’s best for them’’. But far from being a ‘‘tick the box’’ exercise, it turned up something new.
‘‘All the kids said, if we have to leave our parents, we want to stay with our siblings. They’re the ones who share our experiences, and allow us to keep a sense of belonging and identity.’’
The bill now before Parliament stipulates the relationship between the child or young person and their siblings is to be respected, supported and strengthened.
So far, so good. But the legislation also contains wording that’s likely to be a political powder keg, the like of which we’ve not seen for a dozen years. It removes the requirement (in place since 1989) that as a priority and where practicable children should placed with wider whanau or hapu. The new words promise only to respect and honour whakapapa links, leaving the door open for kids to be placed with whichever carer offers the best chance for a safe, secure, stable and loving environment.
Andrew is clear that all research shows the whanau/hapu model works best, but only when it is properly resourced and supported. The expert panel found instead that too many Maori children were placed in substandard care as CYF workers attempted to follow the letter of the law.
The commissioner has high hopes for the new version of what he calls ‘‘the most reviewed organisation in recent history’’, which will start on April 1. Above all, he says, a safe, loving, home-for-life must be the priority.