Family Court fails us: Most Ma¯ori
Report urges new board for care and protection cases
Areport into the experience of Ma¯ori with Oranga Tamariki in the Family Court has revealed a damning insight into how they’re treated and now academics are calling for change.
The report, Te Taniwha I Te Ao Ture-a¯-Wha¯nau, Wha¯nau Experience Of Care And Protection In The Family Court, provides a stark first-hand insight from wha¯nau whose message is clear — “change must happen; it must be comprehensive and it must happen urgently”.
The report writers, academics Dr Amohia Boulton and Lynley Cvitanovic, and lawyers Maia Wikaira and Tania Williams Blyth, now want care and protection cases removed from the already backlogged Family Court jurisdiction and put before a new board. That board would boast 50 per cent Ma¯ori staff and eventually hold Saturday and marae sittings.
Oranga Tamariki has been in the spotlight in recent years after a critical review into the uplift of a 6-dayold Hastings baby that also drew criticism from Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.
The review made recommendations including increasing family consultation and oversight of decisions to move children away from families and into state care, which in November last year Oranga Tamariki said it had implemented.
Just last month, the Office of the Children’s Commissioners also revealed its findings into four uplift cases, revealing “deep systemic issues” in the state care and protection system.
In this new report, many wha¯nau felt let down by administrative and bureaucratic errors and a lack of communication; and that was before entering a courtroom.
Latest 2020 figures showed despite Ma¯ori making up only 25 per cent of all children in New Zealand, they represented 68 per cent of children in state care.
“The legacy of loss and dispossession is compounded by the knowledge that there is an increased likelihood of poor long-term life outcomes for children who have been in state care,” the report states.
It was “well understood that the trajectory for many tamariki Ma¯ori who come to the attention of Oranga Tamariki begins in the Family Court system and ends in the criminal justice system”.
Most non-Ma¯ori participants also felt disillusioned with the process.
The writers propose a new Te Tiriti-consistent partnership model, where care and protection proceedings are handled by a board comprising 50 per cent Ma¯ori.
Change was required to break the status quo, Williams Blyth told the Herald.
Oranga Tamariki had “quite rightly” been in the spotlight many times, but the heat needed to be put on the Family Court itself as it was making the most important decisions in a child’s life.
“We have 6500 kids in care. The Family Court made those orders.”
Anecdotally, Oranga Tamariki had a 95 per cent success rate with its care and protection orders being granted. With that percentage, Williams Blyth asked why it would want to bother changing its processes.
Between October 8 and November 27 last year, 36 Ma¯ori participants were interviewed about their experiences in the Family Court.
Some didn’t know their hearings were taking place, with only two thirds receiving notice about it.
“I missed court dates because I didn’t know it was on,” said one participant. “
Nearly half of those who went to hearings didn’t know the roles of court officials, including the court registrar, social workers, lawyers, and 13.5 per cent of the time, judges. Asked if they knew what was happening at hearings, 64 per cent said they had no or little understanding.
“I didn’t know what to do. I felt quite intimidated,” one said.
Most respondents — 72 per cent — felt they were not included in the decision-making process.
The experience of non-Ma¯ori participants was just as grim, with 63 per cent not given an explanation about the process and in half of all cases only 50 per cent knew who was likely to be in the court room.
Principal Family Court Judge Jacquelyn Moran acknowledged many Ma¯ori felt disadvantaged in their engagement with the Family Court and struggled with the legal process: “Family Court judges are alive to the sorts of concerns that court participants have aired in the report, and . . . it has become a priority to change the way we undertake care and protection work, to promote and facilitate engagement with wha¯nau so as to achieve better outcomes for tamariki.”
Children’s Commissioner Andrew Becroft said the report showed a need for “radical restructuring” and the comments were consistent with what it heard when the commission released the first of two reports into Oranga Tamariki last month.
The findings into the second phase of the report are due next month.