Judge slams Oranga Tamariki over vulnerable children living in hotels for a year
Friday, 14 August 2020
Four displaced young children living in and out of hotels for over a year are stuck on a “bureaucratic roundabout” as Oranga Tamariki admits it failed the vulnerable family. Brad Flahive reports.
A judge has heavily criticised Oranga Tamariki for compromising the wellbeing of four children, all under 11, living in state care.
The Ministry for Children admitted systemic challenges prevented vital therapeutic care and kept the children from whānau willing to look after them.
In June, the children’s father and stepmother, who live in Australia, indicated they could take custody of all four; however, the pair could not afford a lawyer to file the appropriate documentation.
**READ MORE:
* Māori mothers describe child welfare system as dangerous and brutal in new report
* Invercargill social service providers struggle to find housing for at-risk youth
**
And despite an Oranga Tamariki representative claiming “money would not get in the way” of finding a long-term solution for the children, the ministry refused to pay the father’s legal costs to help relocate them to Australia.
Instead, for the past year, Oranga Tamariki has moved the four children around hotels in the Auckland region, while employing a revolving team of trackers – later renamed carers – from a nursing agency to provide around-the-clock care.
The case was heard in the Family Court at Auckland’s Waitakere District Court on Friday, in front of Judge Belinda Pidwell.
Judge Pidwell said if the father and stepmother had legal advice, they could have filed applications to avoid the “bureaucratic roundabout” crippling any progress for the children.
Oranga Tamariki told the court it had held productive conversations with other whānau and the children’s iwi, but no suitable short-term care arrangement could be found.
Prospective caregivers and agencies around Auckland perpetually declined placement, the court heard.
Earlier this year, the eldest child, a 10-year-old girl, was moved to an apartment on her own, and eventually bonded with a carer who spent consistent time with her.
However, the nursing agency employed by the ministry removed the carer from its roster because the pair had formed “an attachment”.
That decision stopped the 10-year-old starting much-needed therapeutic care.
Judge Pidwell expressed concern that “a child who is displaced from her entire family and cared for by a team of nurses, has the one person she is attached to ripped away from her”.
“Oranga Tamariki has the authority to place the child with a contracted agency for day-to-day care, but let the agency make this decision? This is what I can’t understand,” she said.
“These children need to be in therapeutic specialist placements … we are at odds to make the kind of progress to satisfy the court these children’s needs are being met.”
Therapeutic care, which places a heavy emphasis on promoting connection with culture, community and whānau, requires a stable living environment to have an effective impact.
Oranga Tamariki’s own research shows a child’s living environment in state residences should be developmentally enriching, responsive, and therapeutic for children and young people.
Oranga Tamariki said it had since cut ties with the nursing agency claiming its practices were not compatible with the ministry’s policies.
The court also heard how another child was stood down from school for behavioural issues; Judge Pidwell said it was inevitable the children's behaviour would worsen “because they are not in a stable home with therapeutical care”.
At a previous hearing in June, Judge Pidwell escalated the case within Oranga Tamariki and alerted the Children’s Commissioner Judge Andrew Becroft.
But at the latest court hearing, Pidwell said she was concerned “vulnerable young lives” were stuck on the “bureaucratic roundabout”.
A source from within Auckland’s Family Courts told Stuff the issue was reaching a crisis point.
According to ministry figures, 188 children and young people in the custody of Oranga Tamariki were placed in motel accommodation 246 times between July 1, 2019 and June 18, 2020.
Glynis Sandland, deputy chief executive of services for children and families, said Oranga Tamariki did not take the usage of motels lightly.
“We work hard to explore every other possible option before considering a motel. Unfortunately, sometimes a motel is safer than a home for some children and young people,” she said.
“Motels are only used when there are no other placement options available at that time. The situation is reviewed regularly, and we have been working hard to reduce the need for temporary accommodation options such as motels.”
When a young person stays in a motel, there is always someone staying with them to supervise and keep them safe. Often there are two people, she said.
Judge Becroft said he relied on the information given to him by Oranga Tamariki: “We are strongly advised that use of motels has significantly reduced as a form of remand care and is used for a night and no more when a young person is being transported throughout New Zealand.”
He agreed “in principle” the use of motels was “deeply concerning [and] just a parallel system of custody”.
Judge Pidwell scheduled another review of the case in October, but warned Oranga Tamariki if the situation did not improve the court would seek guardianship of the children in a bid to “circumvent the roundabout”.
“In February we expedited that process [to get them to Australia] but by the time those applications went in, the country went to into lockdown,” she said.
“[This time,] pressure needs to be applied to resolve this matter by the end of the year, despite the border issue.”
*An earlier version of this article reported 188 children were placed in motels during the first six months of 2020, the correct period is between July 1, 2019, and June 18, 2020. The article has been updated to reflect this.