82. Churches contributed to building the new settler society in Aotearoa New Zealand, including upholding a social order based on British laws and influenced by Christian values and morals.[99]

83. These societal attitudes meant that during much of the 20th century, Aotearoa New Zealand society expected people to fit in and conform to a narrow definition of what was normal.[100] This contributed to discrimination against indigenous and minority groups.[101]

84. Criminologist John Pratt highlights Aotearoa New Zealand’s high rate of imprisonment across the Inquiry period compared to other OECD nations. He describes Aotearoa New Zealand as intolerant and overly punitive, resulting from:

“a crushing conformity, enforced by intense levels of formal and informal social control and fear of appearing different, fear of not belonging to and fear of being rejected by this tightly drawn homogenous community”.[102]

85. Key societal attitudes (power and control, racism, ableism and disablism, rigid gender roles and homophobia) that persisted across the Inquiry period are outlined below. The Inquiry returns to these attitudes throughout this report, demonstrating how they influenced who went into care and the experiences of children, young people and adults within the care system.

Te mana me te aupēhitanga o te tokoiti o te pāpori
Power and control held by certain members of society

86. Power and control were common themes across the Inquiry period. In relation to care settings, power and control was exercised in different forms:

• State control – laws and policies, removing children from the home and disabled people from society
• Faith-based control – moral authority, trusted to take care of children and young people
• institutional control – hierarchical culture, ableist practices, seclusion, restraint and abusive practices
• individual control – moral authority and power imbalance.

87. In the 20th century, judges, politicians, police officers, doctors, clergy and other church leaders were highly respected, giving them power and influence over people. For example, doctors had the power to influence who went into disability and mental health settings. They were trusted by many in society to know what was best.[103] This included trust in the treatment they provided, as seen in the Beautiful Children: Inquiry into the Lake Alice Child and Adolescent Unit report. The Inquiry found that “staff at the unit had largely unchecked power over vulnerable patients”.[104] Similarly, police officers, social workers and judges in the Children’s Courts held power over who came before the court and what sentences they received. The churches and those who represented them operated with a high degree of impunity because of their standing in the community.[105]

Kaikiri
Racism

Kaikiri torowhare
Institutional Racism

88. A 1986 report to the Minister of Social Welfare, titled Puao-te-Ata-Tū, found that New Zealand institutions – rooted in Pākehā values, systems, and viewpoints – had alienated Māori from their own lands and broken down traditional Māori society.[106] The report noted the history of colonisation was a “history of institutional decisions being made for, rather than by, Māori”.[107]

89. Institutional racism refers to patterns of discrimination and unequal treatment of certain groups based on their race, ethnicity, skin colour or national origin, and results in unequal outcomes for these groups.[108] Researchers have described institutional racism as happening when a powerful group enforces its beliefs on others.[109] These beliefs are then built into State and institutional policy and practice such as in education, healthcare and law enforcement.

90. In Aotearoa New Zealand, the effects of institutional racism are shown in our social statistics, for example, negative statistics in education, crime, child abuse, infant mortality, health and employment. The Puao-te-Ata-Tū Report of 1988 defined institutional racism as:

“The most insidious and destructive form of racism ... It is the outcome of monocultural institutions which simply ignore and freeze out the cultures of those who do not belong to the majority.”[110]

91. Numerous reports and inquiries have shown that institutional racism in criminal justice (including the courts and NZ Police), social welfare and psychiatric systems contributed to the over-representation of young Māori in these settings.[111]

92. Pacific Peoples also experienced strong institutional racism during the Inquiry period, particularly for their children and youth population. Racism and European society’s attitudes towards perceived juvenile delinquency led to the over-surveillance of Pacific children and young people, bringing them to the attention of social welfare and youth justice agencies.

93. Racism was also present in faith-based care settings. For example, the Inquiry’s interim report Stolen Lives, Marked Souls refers to evidence of racism within the Order of the Brothers of St John of God.[112]

Kaikiri ā-ahurea
Cultural racism

94. Cultural racism is found in fixed philosophies and beliefs. “Cultural racism is manifested by negative attitudes to the culture and lifestyle of a minority culture.”[113]

95. In Aotearoa New Zealand, cultural racism appears as a widespread belief that Pākehā culture, lifestyle and values are better than other cultures. It has directed practices of colonisation and assimilation and is passed on to successive generations.[114]

Kaikiri (Matawhaiaro)
Racism (personal)

96. Personal racism happens when an individual is directly diminished or discriminated against on grounds of race. In Aotearoa New Zealand this could look like:

• jokes, disparaging comments and prejudiced attitudes
• being denied access to resources and opportunities in areas of society such as rental housing, work, health and education.

97. Personal racism attacks an individual’s identity and wellbeing and destroys their self-worth.[115] The Inquiry’s previous reports discussed racism experienced by Māori and Pacific survivors in care settings, reflecting the widespread discrimination and racism in society.[116]

Te hāpai toiora me te whakatoiharawhaikaha
Ableism and disablism

98. During the Inquiry period, the settlers’ and faiths’ focus on creating a better society emphasised the importance of physical and mental fitness. This drew attention to people whose bodies and minds were seen as different.[117] The connected concepts of ableism and disablism describe the way that society’s beliefs had a profound effect on how disabled people were treated. Although the words ableism and disablism are sometimes used interchangeably, some disabled people prefer the definitions set out below.[118]

99. Ableism is a belief system that values certain physical and mental characteristics, based on what society views as ‘normal’, productive and desirable.[119] Ableism values non-disabled people over disabled people. The beliefs underpinning the eugenics movement are an example of ableism. Ableism continues to be widespread and systemic in Aotearoa New Zealand, and directed affects how society treats disabled people. These values and attitudes are so ingrained in society’s structures and institutions that many people are not aware they are thinking in an ableist way.

100. Disablism is the acts of discrimination against, and abuse or neglect of, disabled people that result from the ableist belief that they are less ‘valuable’ than non-disabled people. Examples of disablism include:

• using a slur or derogatory word to describe a disabled person
• thinking that disabled people are helpless or a burden on society
• ignoring someone who is disabled or speaking condescendingly to them
• denying a disabled person medical treatment or treating them differently to non-disabled patients
• assuming that a disabled person cannot do something.

101. For Deaf people, disablism can also take the form of audism. The ableist belief that values oral communication of non-oral communication (such as sign language) results in audism – discrimination against Deaf people and hard of hearing people. Examples of audism include:

• forcing someone to use oral communication instead of sign language
• assuming someone is not intelligent if they do not use oral communication
• assuming that being Deaf or hard of hearing is a ‘tragedy’.

Te kaupapa tutū ira me te tauira hauora whaikaha
The eugenics movement and medical model of disability

102. Eugenics was a social and political 19th and 20th century movement that believed unwanted genetic characteristics could be bred out of the human population. These characteristics included traits and behaviours considered undesirable, such as committing crimes, being poor, having sex outside of marriage, mental distress, learning difficulties and having a small stature.[120]

103. Over the early decades of the 20th century, the eugenics movement influenced State measures to identify, classify, group and segregate disabled people and people who experienced mental distress from the rest of society.[121]

104. Society also held a general fear of mental distress that was perpetuated by the State, faiths and widespread acceptance of the medical model of disability. This refers to disability being seen as “an individual’s problem, something wrong or broken that could be cured or contained”.[122] The model is explored further in the Inquiry’s Beautiful Children: Inquiry into the Lake Alice Child and Adolescent Unit report.[123]

Ngā waiaro ki te hunga Turi
Attitudes towards Deaf people

105. As discussed in Part 1, many Deaf people do not consider they are disabled, rather they are part of a cultural and linguistic group for whom sign language is a key marker of identity.

106. In the 19th century Deaf people were often referred to as “deaf-mutes” or “deaf and dumb” and seen as infirm.[124] In 1880, the Milan Conference declared that sign Language in Deaf education be abolished.[125] In its place, it recommended oralism, which focused on lipreading and speaking aloud rather than sign Language.

107. That same year, the Sumner Institution for the Deaf and Dumb opened in Ōtautahi Christchurch. It changed its name to Van Asch College in 1980, and to the Van Asch Deaf Education Centre in 1995. In 2020 it combined with Kelston Deaf Education Centre in Tamaki Makaurau Auckland to become Ko Taku Reo: Deaf Education New Zealand.

108. Aotearoa New Zealand, like many countries, chose to follow the recommendation to stop teaching any form of sign language in schools[126] and the practice continued until the mid-1970s. Up until 1979, the Department of Education (now the Ministry of Education) banned sign language from the classroom. In some schools, it was banned in the playground and in boarding residences.[127]

He māramatanga ki te kanorautanga ā-hinengaro, te mate waipiro ki te kōpū me te wharaūpoko
Understanding of neurodiversity, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder and head injury

109. For some survivors, their entry into care may have been due to undiagnosed neurodivergence, foetal alcohol spectrum disorder (FASD) or head injuries (traumatic brain injury), which are a common cause of disability for children and young people in Aotearoa New Zealand.[128]

110. These conditions were poorly understood for much of the Inquiry period and diagnosis and treatment was limited. The conditions were generally considered incurable, so the people were congregated and separated from society instead.[129]

111. Before 1980, autistic children were often misdiagnosed as having childhood schizophrenia. The characteristics associated with being autistic, such as intense anxiety and escalating behaviours, often resulted in children and young people who were in care being sedated, restrained or kept in seclusion.[130] This was also the case for autistic adults.[131]

112. For children with attention deficit hyperactive disorder, a lack of understanding of the condition meant that many people did not see them as having additional support needs but rather as difficult and needing to be disciplined. They could be seen as too hard to manage and institutionalised in special schools or psychopaedic hospitals. Like autistic people, they were often sedated or disciplined for their behaviour.[132]

113. The Inquiry heard from expert witnesses that without correct diagnosis, neurodiversity can look like aggression or misbehaviour. Today it is understood that neurodivergent people in care could be experiencing anxiety and distress due to being in environments inappropriate for their needs.[133]

114. It was not until the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) was revised in 1987 that a clinical understanding of autism spectrum disorder and neurodiversity was available.

115. Traumatic brain injury affects the parts of the brain that help with self-regulation and self-control. It also increases the risk of behavioural issues and mental distress.[134] It is the leading cause of long-term disability in children. In Aotearoa New Zealand, a 2013 study found that children (aged 0–14), and young people and young adults (aged 15–34) made up almost 70 percent of all traumatic brain injury cases.[135] Some international evidence shows that young people in custody have a greater incidence of traumatic brain injury than is found in the general population.[136]

116. Aotearoa New Zealand does not have any specific study on traumatic brain injury in children or young people in foster care or the youth residential system. However, traumatic brain injuries have been shown to be more common in people in the justice system than in the public in Aotearoa New Zealand. A 2017 paper prepared by the Justice sector found that people with traumatic brain injuries accounted for 34 percent of people facing police proceedings and 46 percent of people imprisoned, compared with 13 percent of the general population.[137]

117. FASD is still not well understood or recognised by health professionals today.[138] However, there is increasing awareness worldwide that people with FASD are over-represented in the criminal justice system.[139]

118. While interacting with institutional structures and systems and without adequate support, children, young people and adults in care with FASD may find it difficult to reason, use judgement, make decisions, match their emotions and behaviour to social situations and think through consequences.[140]

Te whakahāwea wāhine, kōtiro hoki
Discrimination against women and girls

119. Europeans came to Aotearoa New Zealand at a time when the idea of the nuclear family with the husband/father figure as the household leader was emerging. European women did not have independent legal identities and their bodies and children were considered the property of their husbands.[141] Women carried the main responsibility for childcare and housekeeping and faced legal and social barriers to participation in civil life and employment.[142]

120. In the 19th century, churches established women’s homes in response to concerns about prostitution and women’s sexuality, to address what they saw as unhealthy sexual behaviour and a threat to morality. Missionaries sought to ‘rescue’ women seen to be at risk.

121. The rigid gender roles of the 19th century continued into the 20th century. For a large part of the 20th century, unmarried mothers were viewed as a social problem and as incapable of providing adequate care for their children.

122. In the 1950s, after the disruption of the Second World War, gender and class roles became more tightly enforced. Society often discriminated against working women, unmarried mothers and sexually active young women. There was growing public concern about rising sexual promiscuity among teens, particularly focused on the behaviour of teenage girls.[143]

123. Access to contraception was restricted for the first two decades of the Inquiry period due to a combination of moral concerns and a continuing State focus on social stability through the nuclear family, traditional gender roles and sustaining the Pākehā birth rate.[144] Both unmarried and married women could struggle to access birth control, with doctors described as “the guardians of health and to some degree the morals of the community.”[145]

124. Women’s wages were lower than men’s across the Inquiry period. For at least the first three decades of the Inquiry period women had a limited range of low wage career options, including teaching, nursing clerical work, cleaning, sewing and shop work.[146] Combining work with caring for children and other family members added further challenges to women’s ability to be financially independent.[147] By 1970, women were still facing barriers to participation in society including gendered violence and limited access to some public spaces (such as bars), childcare for working mothers, and healthcare.[148]

Te whakahāwea i runga i te aronga hemahematanga me te tuakiri ia
Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity

125. Homosexuality was considered a psychiatric disorder until 1973 in Aotearoa New Zealand.[149] Medicalisation of homosexuality peaked in the 1950s and 1960s and included conversion practices with the aim of changing a person’s sexual identity or gender expression.[150]

126. Sexual relations between adult men were decriminalised in Aotearoa New Zealand in 1986. Before 1993, there was no legal protection from discrimination in employment, education, access to public places, provision of goods and services, and housing and accommodation on the grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity.[151]

127. Sexual relations between adult women were not illegal, but many lesbians suffered the same social discrimination as gay men. Data collection in New Zealand on sexual orientation and gender identity was non-existent, meaning there was no ability for rainbow people to be counted. This lack of visibility was a barrier to receiving specific targeted funding and assistance.

Ngā waiaro ki ngā tamariki me ngā rangatahi
Attitudes towards children and young people

128. Social attitudes towards children and young people during the Inquiry period could be harsh.

129. David Ausubel, an American psychiatrist and psychologist who was a Fulbright scholar at Victoria University in Te Whanganui-ā-Tara Wellington in the late 1950s, described adult-child relationships in Aotearoa New Zealand as still being Victorian.[152]

130. He thought Aotearoa New Zealand had an “authoritarian, moralistic and punitive approach” to youth and that normal child and adolescent misbehaviour were dealt with by overly strict discipline.[153] His perception as a visitor to Aotearoa New Zealand was that New Zealanders did not seem to value open, warm relationships with children and young people and that their rights and dignity were not respected.[154]

131. These attitudes were also reflected in Aotearoa New Zealand’s low age of criminal responsibility. In 1950, the age of criminal responsibility was 7 years old. It was raised to 10 years old in 1961 and remained at that age for the rest of the Inquiry period.[155] Children and young people aged from 7 to 14 could be convicted of an offence if the court considered that they knew what they had done was wrong.[156]

132. Children and young people in care settings were often viewed as troublemakers, inferior and flawed. Some people considered children and young people in care as beyond reform and deserving of punishment.[157]

133. Harsh attitudes could criss-cross with other prejudices. Although most girls entering the care system had experienced prior sexual assault,[158] this was often attributed to their own promiscuity and characterised as deviant sexual behaviour. Māori girls were particularly singled out by authorities as having a lax attitude toward sex and considered to be delinquent in nature.[159]

Ngā waiaro ki ngā tāngata e noho pōhara ana
Attitudes towards people living in poverty

134. Families and communities experiencing poverty often faced judgement, multiple stressors such as issues with income and housing instability, and lacked the time and resources to forge strong social connections.[160] Social stories and beliefs about poverty in Aotearoa New Zealand – for example, in the media – represented poor families as a dangerous social underclass characterised by moral decline, welfare-dependency, large families and criminality.[161] The Inquiry heard from Pākehā, Māori and Pacific survivors who were impacted by these attitudes, along with their wider families.

135. Research shows poverty is a significant contributing factor for children entering care, and for families and communities experiencing generations of State and faith-based involvement. The report Cracks in the Dam looks at how social and economic forces impacted the care system in Aotearoa New Zealand, stating that:

“compared to children in the richest fifth of local areas, children in the poorest fifth areas have 13 times the rate of ‘substantiation’ (a finding by child protection officials that abuse has occurred). They are also six times more likely to be placed out of their family’s care”.[162]

136. These higher rates of findings that abuse has occurred can be due to factors such as negative attitudes towards poorer communities, over-surveillance, racism and bias and lack of services that support families.[163]

Te wāhi o te ao pāpāho ki te whakaū i ngā waiaro ā-pāpori
Media’s role in enforcing societal attitudes

137. Throughout the Inquiry period media depictions often reinforced negative stereotypes towards Māori, Pacific peoples, and disabled people who experienced poverty and people who experienced mental distress.

Ngā arotoka whakakino mō te Māori i whakaū
Negative stereotypes of Māori were reinforced

138. Māori have consistently been discriminated against through the media. This started with colonial news media wanting to depict Māori as threatening, immoral and violent to fit with the view that Māori needed civilising and to “discredit their struggle for land and rights”.[164]

139. From 1950 to 1999 the media continued discriminating against Māori, often with sensationalised stories. A 1952 article in The Press discussing the health of Māori children quoted a Department of Health official who suggested that Māori mothers spent the child benefit on sweets, taxis and gambling and were partially to blame for Māori infant mortality.[165]

140. Consistent themes used by the media during the Inquiry period include:

• the ‘Māori violence’ theme, which portrays Māori as more likely to be violent and in need of control on account of their presumed ‘danger’
• the ‘stirrers’ theme, which depicts Māori who challenge the status quo as troublemakers
• the ‘good Māori/bad Māori’ theme, which portrays Māori who resist, demand recognition or seek restitution as bad
• the ‘Māori resources’ theme, which constructs potential or actual Māori control of land, fisheries or money as a threat to others
• the ‘financial probity’ theme, which involves persistent depictions of Māori as corrupt or economically incompetent. [166]

141. The ‘Māori violence’ theme is the most significant when considering how tamariki and rangatahi Māori were removed from whānau and entered the care system. The media contributed to sustaining the narrative that Māori parents were more likely to be violent by having a disproportionate focus on child abuse and crime relating to tamariki and rangatahi Māori.[167] This is a continuation of racist 19th century views of Māori, particularly Māori men, as primitive and savage.[168]

I kaha ake te whakatoihara i te hunga penihana
Prejudice against people on benefits was heightened

142. Media stories during the Inquiry period tended to heighten fear and prejudice about ‘dangerous’ and welfare-dependent families and communities.[169] From the 1970s there was prejudice towards solo mothers receiving the Domestic Purposes Benefit (DPB). Five years after it was introduced, the State established the Domestic Purposes Review Committee to look at the reason for the rising number of parents receiving the DPB and whether “the provision of the benefit was influencing marital and reproductive behaviour”.[170]

143. The media often framed any stories on the Committee’s findings negatively, even though the data used by the Committee was incorrect and misleading.[171] For example, the media focused on the costs to the taxpayer[172] and whether the benefit provided an incentive for women to leave their husbands.[173]

144. Newspapers also discussed cases where women were seen to be “ripping off” the system by receiving a benefit while in a de facto relationship.[174] People on the benefit were often referred to as bludgers[175], spongers[176] or milking the system.[177] These attitudes intersected with racism where narratives about Māori and poverty combined to represent a double burden in how Māori were depicted in the media.[178]

Te whakahāwea i ngā tāngata e rongo ana i te wairangitanga
Discrimination against people experiencing mental distress

145. For people suffering from mental distress, media depictions often portrayed them as dangerous and linked mental distress with “violence, failure, and unpredictability.”[179]

146. A study into how Aotearoa New Zealand print media discriminated against people suffering from mental distress found that the public got most of their information about mental illness from the media.[180]

147. People suffering from mental distress rarely had their personal perspectives shared. The media usually used the perspectives of medical professionals or people without lived experience to create the narrative.[181] The second Mason Report in 1996 reported the Association of Crown Health Enterprise (CHE) Mental Health Managers as saying:

“There is also some concern that the media and political portrayal of psychiatric patients as offenders, paedophiles, etc. will deter some people from using the service when needed – either because of fear of other patients or of being seen as one of that group.

Negative publicity commonly leads to a breach of clients’ rights in that they are discriminated against (often not intentionally) due to the anxiety provoked within the public.”[182]

Footnotes