Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

22 Comments

  1. My neighbour for around twenty years is fluent in Te Reo and a kaumatua in for our local Bay of Plenty hapu. His children went to Kohanga Reo with my children and are now adults. Some take a keen interest in their Maori heritage, some less so.
    We talked about this over beer on the veranda a few years ago. My friend and neighbour pointed out that some people take an immediate interest in Maoritanga, some develop it over time.
    He then opened up and revealed that while still a toddler he was removed from his birth whanau. He grew up in Southland as the fostered child of pakeha parents( actually Scottish immigrants).
    He was raised in a healthy, happy home and it was his foster parents who encouraged him to not be a ‘brown pakeha”. ”They helped me be a Maori” said Reg.
    When he later had contact with his whanau he realised that alcoholism had blighted their lives and he was removed from their care because of injuries they had inflicted on him.
    I do not offer this as a solution to the complex situations that arise from children’s safety, cultural identity and all the other factors involved.
    I simply offer it as an example of a Maori New Zealander who was not prevented from identifying with his culture because of happy, healthy childhood with Pakeha parents.

  2. I thought it was a well written piece, and likely the strongest wording that would get past a Stuff editor.

  3. Surely unconditional love, care and stability are far more important than so called Tikanga values or principles? Also, if these values are so great and effective the. Why the appalling child abuse stats amongst Maori?

    Does love not transcend all? To accept the premise that Tikanga or the like is somehow more important for a child than unconditional love is racist, anachronistic and damaging to our society.

  4. Yes what a hero Damien Grant is…..OBE to hom and the Judge.

    The scandal that is this case defies belief…..

    And now the biological mother of Moana is appealing the judgement, likely encouraged by ideologically motivated lawyers. I don’t want to be down on this woman, but where is her insight into her own actions that have lead her to have five children removed? Likely she was a victim of a similarly abusive background, but some people who have been victims of such abused become determined not to repeat it.

    Btw what crap the legal person talked in the article where she says providing for someone’s cultural needs is as important as health and safety.
    Ffs.

  5. The problem with placing children with people outside their culture is that you end up with stolen generations. Children who know they do not look like the people who bought them up but who have no connection to the people they look like.

    1. For sure, at the point of uplift children should be placed with their Iwi but if that is not possible then why not placement to a Pakeha family if they can provide a stable loving home. With cultural support this does not need to be a mutually exclusive situation, (see Stevie’s comment). What someone looks like should have nothing to do with it.

    2. If possible of course Maori children should be placed with their IWI. Pakeha with any extended family. But that is if people from the IWi or extended family put up their hands.

      The bond isn’t due to looking like ones family. Its far more primitive than that.
      These kids aren’t being stolen. They are being removed from parents who are damaging them. Seriously damaging them.

  6. Sir Wira Gardiner can claim the Judge bullied the social worker. Has anyone claimed Sir Wira Gardiner tried to bully the Judge?

  7. Lucy’s statement:The problem with placing children with people outside their culture is that you end up with stolen generations. Children who know they do not look like the people who bought them up but who have no connection to the people they look like.

    This doesn’t fit with the first comment. The step-foster parents made sure that the child was involved in their own culture. There is much emotional talk and jumping to conclusions in this item. One example in the article was about seeing the child being wiped clean off messy vegemite but the onlooker came up with some fanciful fiction to explain it.

    Maori try to wrap around their young people with good values and measures, and when successful there won’t be any need for Oranga Tamariki. The Maori at the head of these groups have often become so middle-class that they have lost touch with the need of the strugglers for assistance, training, guidance, firmness, respect and love.

  8. This is clearly a fundamental issue regarding the choice between harmony and discord, future and past. Somehow you’d think the priority would be obvious at this time. It’s a shame that covid derangement clouds the picture and distracts from what is needed.

  9. This is clearly a fundamental issue regarding the choice between harmony and discord, future and past. Somehow you’d think the priority of consideration would be obvious at this time. It’s a shame that covid derangement clouds the picture and distracts from what is needed.

  10. People from the childrens’ Iwi can’t put up their hands if they don’t know anything cause OT/CYFS hasn’t bothered to do their jobs. I have experienced this with OT and caught them out telling lies and got an apology. They OT/CYFS rush to get the kids of their books to make themselves look good. Culture and whakapapa is important to many of our people and we have a right to be Maori in our own country. We are not one people we are two peoples who signed the TOW and one people got everything and the other got fuck all.

  11. Dear Marty Sharpe, I am disturbed by your recent article in Stuff (15 Sep), ‘Can Pākehā caregivers provide adequate cultural support for Māori children in care?’, the latest in a series on the treatment by Oranga Tamariki of the child ‘Moana’.
    My attention was drawn to your report by a blog by the socialist commentator Martyn Bradbury, ‘Why Damien Grant is a wimp’.
    He was responding to Damien Grant’s column in Stuff (19 Sep), ‘What happened to ‘Moana’ was abuse at the hands of Oranga Tamariki’.
    In that column Grant, supporting Judge Peter Callinicos’s dismissal of Oranga Tamariki’s application to have the girl removed and placed with a Māori family, says Oranga Tamariki was placing adherence to a cultural belief, a policy, a dogma, ahead of the interests of a 6-year-old girl who had suffered grievously in her first three years and was thriving in her new home.
    “From the very moment Moana went into the care of (the caregivers) she found; love, stability, devotion, nutrition, freedom from family violence and substance abuse.”
    Marty, your coverage of the case, which I read in Stuff of 14 August and 9 September, was sympathetic, impartial, and comprehensive. What disturbs me about your article of 15 September is that four leaders of the Māori community all line up against little Moana, and agree that she must be removed from the foster parents who for three years have been caring for her, and handed to others, because her need for appropriate enculturation must take precedence over her need for love in the secure environment she knows. This expands on similar statements by an iwi leader in your report ‘Oranga Tamariki decision to be appealed by birth mother’ (Stuff, 10 Sep).
    Could you not find even just one leader of the Māori community to wholeheartedly support the judge, and speak up for Moana’s right to stay and be loved in the environment she has lived in these past three years?
    Marty, I really am hoping that your lineup of four Māori leaders all insisting that enculturation must be paramount is simply a reflection of the pressure you are under to embrace Stuff’s new-found party line on ameliorating the effects of colonisation. Because otherwise, if you really could find no one to speak up for Moana, it is a terrible indictment of the powerful voices who direct the thinking of Te Ao Māori today.
    John Trezise

    Dear John — Thank you for writing.
    As you note, Marty Sharpe has reported extensively on this matter, covering a complicated case with wider implications. As part of this, we have tried to explore relevant angles, and this question was central to the case so therefore required further exploration.
    We expect everyone can understand the need for a child to have love and stability etc., but very few of us laypeople had contemplated the idea that a child’s culture could be considered as important as those things. Not more important, AS important.
    I would also say that the article was helpful in providing a sense of balance too, in that the prevailing view of the matter was that of course Moana should stay with the Pākehā foster parents. Marty’s reason for writing it was to let readers see what the opposing point of view was (especially given that OT had failed to explain it in a sensible manner).
    Best, Anna Fifield, Editor

Comments are closed.