48. Part 3 of the Inquiry's final report, Whanaketia – Through pain and trauma, from darkness to light, sets out the circumstances that led to children, young people and adults entering State and faith-based care during the Inquiry period. Racism and other discriminatory attitudes created pathways for Pacific children, young people and adults entering care.

49. Between the 1950s and 1980s, Pacific people experienced heightened State surveillance and targeting by NZ Police and other State agencies, contributing to a disproportionate number of Pacific people entering social welfare care. Challenges with immigration, including language barriers, poverty and societal attitudes, also contributed to Pacific people entering care settings, especially social welfare care.

50. Family and community expectations and the extent to which religion was part of their everyday life and culture influenced Pacific children and young people entering faith-based schools.

51. While the Inquiry saw evidence of Pacific children, young people and adults entering all State and faith-based care settings, this chapter focuses on care settings where the pathways for Pacific Peoples had particular features – social welfare care and faith-based education.

Pathways into social welfare care settings

Pacific children and young people’s entry was disproportionate

52. Data gaps are particularly pronounced for Pacific survivors during the Inquiry period. Pacific Peoples were frequently grouped with Māori in a general ‘Māori / Pacific’ category, or simply under the category of ‘Polynesian’, or their ethnicity was not recorded. This makes it difficult to provide a meaningful picture of Pacific Peoples representation in care, especially early in the Inquiry period.

53. The available records show that, by the 1980s, Pacific children and young people were disproportionately represented in social welfare residences. For example:

• In 1970, 58 percent (36 girls) of the 62 girls admitted into Kingslea Girls’ Home in Ōtautahi Christchurch were identified as Māori or Pacific. The report did not differentiate between the two groups and made a comment with racist undertones, stating that the increase in Māori and Pacific girls “introduced new problems for training and discipline”.[37]
• In 1975, 8 percent (three girls) of the 38 girls admitted into Kingslea Girls’ Home were identified as Pacific.[38]
• In 1983, Pacific children and young people made up 16 percent (330 people) of the 2,027 residents of six social welfare residences in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland – Allendale Girls’ Home, Bollard Girls’ Home, Ōwairaka Boys’ Home, Te Atatū Group Home, Wesleydale Boys’ Home, and Weymouth Girls’ Home. At that time Pacific people made up just over 6 percent of the youth population.[39]
• A 1987 Department of Social Welfare study found that, of 239 girls aged 15–16 who were under the guardianship of the Director-General of Social Welfare, 51 percent were Māori, 37 percent were Pākehā and 12 percent were from other ethnic groups, primarily of “Pacific Island origin”.[40] 

Racism and other discrimination against Pacific Peoples created pathways into social welfare care

54. Societal attitudes and discriminatory beliefs, including racism, negative perceptions about migrants and ‘overstayers’, and moral panic about youth behaviours, contributed to Pacific children and young people entering social welfare care. Pacific survivors told the Inquiry about the challenges faced by their families, such as racism, housing insecurity, poverty and loss of culture and identity after migrating.

55. Expert witness, clinical psychologist and Associate Professor Folasāitu Dr Apaula Julia loane has extensive experience working with Pacific fanau (children) and tagata talavou (young people) in social welfare care settings and spoke at the Inquiry’s Tulou, Our Pacific Voices: Tatala e Pulonga (Pacific Peoples’ Experiences) Hearing. She noted racism and negative experiences with migration, among other contributing factors that led to State intervention:

“Some survivors spoke about their negative experiences with migration that included racism, poverty, loss of identity and cultural belonging. Many survivors also reported negative experiences in education such as language barriers, bullying by teachers and feelings of isolation leading to their noncompliant behaviour.”[41]

56. Samoan survivor Fa’amoana Luafutu came to Aotearoa New Zealand when he was 8 years old and within two years was before the Children’s Board and placed into social welfare care. Fa’amoana explained some of the difficulties faced by his family after migrating:

“When my family first arrived, we needed support to adapt to the New Zealand way of life, not judgement and expectation that we just fit in straight away. My parents’ dream of a better life collided with the cultural ignorance of mainstream New Zealand in the 1950s and onward.”[42]

57. Professor Elizabeth Stanley explained that Pacific children and young people who “offended Pākehā sensibilities” often found themselves “inspected by authorities who readily legitimised institutionalisation as a means to domesticate, civilise or control them.”[43] This was particularly evident during the Dawn Raids period of 1974–1976.[44] Pacific survivor Mr TY shared that while walking home in his school uniform, he would be stopped by NZ Police and asked about the number of people living in his home and whether any of them arrived in the country recently. He said that the blatant targeting of Pacific Peoples was a normal thing in Ponsonby.[45]

58. Expert witness Tigilau Ness, a NZ born Niuean who was a political activist and member of the Polynesian Panthers, told the Inquiry:

“It was not uncommon for Pacific Islanders to get picked up for no reason by the Police and be charged with idle and disorderly offences. Some of our children would be taken.”[46]

59. Some survivors came to the attention of State authorities following complaints from neighbours. Māori and Pacific survivor Te Enga Harris was taken from the care of her family after a complaint, because “…my father was Deaf and there was always a lot of yelling and screaming so he could hear us.”[47]

60. Samoan survivor David Williams (aka John Williams) said he was picked on by NZ Police for no reason:

“I could be walking down the street and Police would just pick on me. I would be with two white fellas and if there were two of us darkies, the cops would pull us up and leave the white guys alone. That’s what it was like … it got to the stage where I think because I was being picked up so many times by the Police and labelled a criminal, it became normal.”[48]

Poverty and financial hardship led to care

61. Some survivors came to the attention of authorities because of their parents’ financial circumstances. Often the only jobs Pacific Peoples could get were low paying, labour intensive and with long hours. This affected how children and young people could be cared for and meant they were left alone and / or responsible for the care of their younger siblings.[49] Research shows a clear relationship between poverty and care system contact.[50] Compared to children and young people in the richest fifth of local areas, those in the poorest fifth areas have 13 times the rate of substantiation (a finding by officials that abuse has occurred). They are also six times more likely to be placed out of family care.[51]

62. Some Pacific children and young people resorted to stealing food because they were hungry, and this led to them coming to the attention of State authorities.[52]

63. Niuean, Tahitian and Māori (Ngāpuhi) survivor Mr VV was left at home alone as both of his parents had to work to pay for necessities, which meant they did not have time to constantly supervise him. The State became involved:

“I feel like I was taken away from home for nothing, because I wasn't going to school. Sometimes I blame my mother, but then I think to myself, what else could she do? My parents both had to work to pay the mortgage and buy a car and feed us.” [53]

64. Cook Islands and Māori (Ngāpuhi) survivor Mr UU went into care from a home environment where his grandparents had a lot of children to care for. His teachers observed that Mr UU had no lunch at school and was stealing food, so it was clear that the whānau needed wraparound support but did not receive it. NZ Police laid a complaint against his grandparents, which led to him being placed with an aunt and uncle. He described this placement as “a big turning point” in his life, as he got “the meanest hidings” there. Mr UU said:

“I can’t imagine how scary, intimidating and shameful that would have been for them. It feels to me that the police complaint made my grandparents feel like the only option was to give me up. The reports say it was a family decision to put me with my aunt and uncle, but my family would have felt very pressured. I know that culturally it would have been hard for my grandparents to deal with the police, and they would do anything to get rid of them because they were scared and ashamed.”[54]

Abuse and neglect at home

65. The Inquiry heard from Pacific survivors who experienced physical, psychological and sexual abuse and neglect at home, by parents or non-family members, which led to being taken into care.

66. Niuean and Māori survivor Kamahl Tupetagi (Ngāpuhi), who was placed in social welfare care aged 9 years old, explained that his life with his parents was abusive and difficult:

“As well as the parties and drinking, there was lots of abuse during that time. I had a lot of physical abuse between the ages of about three and six. I was also sexually abused by people who would come and go at the house during parties and drinking.”[55]

67. Asian, Niuean and Māori survivor Jason Fenton (Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Kuri) described the violence and abuse he suffered at the hands of a stepfather and how this compounded other challenging factors in his life, such as the effects of suspected foetal alcohol spectrum disorder. Jason went into foster care as respite after a family tragedy, and later a youth justice facility and Te Whakapakari Youth Programme on Aotea Great Barrier Island:[56]

“I can never forget the violence, the beatings, the yelling and the abuse. I had learning difficulties at school; being beaten up at home affected my brain so I had difficulty concentrating.”[57]

68. Pacific survivors told the Inquiry that their parents’ or caregivers’ harmful alcohol or substance use increased the risk of abuse and neglect being perpetuated in the home environment.[58]

‘Acting out’ in response to distress was a pathway into care

69. Pacific survivors told the Inquiry how the conditions they were experiencing at home, and sometimes at school, affected their behaviour. Poverty, parental addictions and mental health challenges, abuse, neglect and undiagnosed and unsupported disabilities frequently resulted in children and young people ‘acting out’. Often challenging behaviour drew the attention of teachers, social workers and NZ Police, which led to State intervention and being taken into social welfare care.

70. Professor Elizabeth Stanley’s book, Road to Hell, is based on the experiences of 105 former State wards.[59] Eighty-seven percent of Dr Stanley’s participants came from homes where stress factors were prominent.[60] Nearly half of the participants came into contact with State authorities through offending (generally theft or property offences or, less commonly, violent offending), while one-third entered social welfare care through the vaguely defined category of ‘delinquency’, which might include antisocial or ‘unfavourable’ behaviour.[61]

71. Some Pacific survivors commented that nobody inquired more deeply into why they were behaving in a particular way or asked them what was going on in their lives or at home.[62] Pacific and Māori survivor Te Enga Harris remembered the day she and her siblings were removed by the State:

“I have relived this day over and over in my head. My mother was a kind and gentle woman. There was no need to treat her that way and she certainly did not deserve to be handcuffed. The Police assaulted my mother that day and for that I can never forgive them. One day we had a mother and then she was gone.

“My mother needed help with eight children and therapy for her grief. I strongly believe her condition would have worsened significantly by being taken away from all her children. Rather than the State providing her with the help she needed she was punished further.”[63]

72. Samoan survivor Mr TY was 12 years old when he ran away from his abusive home and lived in a tree hut for three months. A friend brought him food and when Mr TY was desperate, he took milk money from milk bottles outside houses to buy food. He was picked up by NZ Police after he was found walking along the road with a blanket, and taken to Ōwairaka Boys’ Home in Tāmaki Makaurau Auckland in March 1975:

“After reading my file so many years later, I realised that I was charged with ‘Not Being Under [Proper] Control’ for running away from my abusive household. I had told the Police that I took money from milk bottles to survive so they also charged me with theft.” [64]

73. Some Pacific survivors who migrated to Aotearoa New Zealand were not offered support to learn English, which led to difficulties at school and their subsequent entry into care.[65] Survivor Fa’amoana Luafutu arrived from Samoa without speaking English and found it difficult to cope at school as he couldn’t understand what was going on. This caused Fa’amoana to start truanting, along with his cousins:

“That’s how we first came to the attention of the State. It was deemed that we were out of control.”[66]

Pathways into faith-based education

74. Faith-based schools have been, and continue to be, the main providers of faith-based care for children and young people in Aotearoa New Zealand. Schools are operated or associated with the Anglican, Catholic, Methodist, Presbyterian, Plymouth Brethren and Gloriavale churches. These schools offer a combination of primary and secondary education and boarding facilities.

75. For Pacific families, the influence of the church in daily life led to children being enrolled in faith-run schools, and often faith-based schooling for children from devout Pacific families was simply a given. Pacific survivors spoke about how religion and culture were so interwoven that families would willingly open their homes to members of the church and clergy and enrol their children in religious schools.[67]

76. The Inquiry also heard from Pacific survivors who were sent to faith-based schools due to the perception that these private or State integrated schools would offer students a higher standard of education and opportunity than State schools.[68]

Government education scholarships for Pacific children and young people

77. Another pathway into care for Pacific children and young people was through New Zealand Government education scholarships. As part of the scholarship, children and young people from Pacific Island nations including Tokelau, Fiji, Tonga and Samoa were sent to Aotearoa New Zealand and placed in State-run social welfare residences or faith-based boarding schools.[69]

78. The Inquiry heard from a survivor who came to Aotearoa New Zealand from the Tokelauan atoll Nukunonu on a scholarship in 1981 when he was 12 years old.[70] He was placed in Sedgley Boys’ Home (Anglican) in Whakaoriori Masterton where he faced racism, was abused by other boys and felt that he was in constant survival mode.[71] He felt unsupported and struggled to integrate into his new environment.[72] He used simple English and along with Tokelauan students mostly used body language, gestures and sign language to communicate with non-Tokelauan people.[73]

79. A 2010 review of Tokelauan education noted the flaws in the scholarship scheme, such as the language barriers faced by the Tokelauan students. Many required support to be in place to assist with their transition into the Aotearoa New Zealand education system, but limited if any support was provided. As a result, many would fail their national exams, creating conflict with parents, who expected them to return home well-educated and skilled.[74]

80. Pacific young people also entered the care of faith-based boarding schools through scholarship schemes offered to students who either excelled in certain areas or whose kainga (family) required financial assistance. Samoan and Scottish survivor William Wilson was a scholarship student at Wesley College in Pukekohe, a Methodist boarding school that described itself as a “practical expression” of the Methodist Church’s concern for education, particularly for Māori and Pacific students, orphans and those from disadvantaged backgrounds.[75]

81. William was raised mostly by his grandparents as his father had passed away and his mother struggled with mental distress. His grandfather and social worker made the decisions for William to enrol at Wesley College. At Wesley College, William endured serious physical violence by older students and described the school as having a culture of violence.[76]

Footnotes