Turner Judy: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
Turner Judy: Debate on Prime Minister’s Statement 
[Volume:615;Page:10973] 
JUDY TURNER (United Future) 
: 
 Of all policy areas covered in the Prime Minister’s speech I want to focus on family policy because family policy needs to be built on a solid theoretical foundation and needs to be shaped by cutting-edge research and innovation—like all other areas of Government. If New Zealand families are to thrive due to effective Government policy then we need to re-examine the core principles that underpin our family policy here in New Zealand and determine whether our limited resources are being channelled in the right direction. If the Government genuinely wants to build fences at the top of the proverbial cliff—and I believe that every political party would want to own that claim—rather than sink millions of dollars into remedial social services each year then we have to develop social services that utilise current theories and not remain ignorant of them. 
There is an expanding body of internationally recognised ideas that attempts to map the factors that help individuals families and communities to change and adapt in the face of extreme pressure. For instance a nationwide audit of Australia’s prevention programmes 4 years ago discussed the strength-based or solutions-focused approach and family support models as already being a key facet of strategies to prevent social problems in Australia. The report noted: “Many agencies have begun to refocus their work with families to empower clients focusing on a family’s potential to change rather than just their problems and attempting to engage family members in a truly cooperative venture to find solutions to their issues. An underlying tenet of this perspective is that all families have strengths and capabilities.” 
In many areas New Zealand is a world leader. In the area of social services and development however it is time that New Zealand began to make up the distance—not necessarily in funding but in policy. In our present and historical approach we are very good at identifying risk behaviours quantifying both them and a raft of other forensic strategies. At the end of all our efforts we are left with a good idea of the problem but our ability to construct positive and lasting solutions for families lacks substance. The trouble is we cannot make someone change unless we are prepared to trample on a whole gamut of human rights enshrined throughout New Zealand law. Our risk-based paradigm is great for delivering us pathology but it tells only half the story. Therefore we need to be equipped with the tools to support and foster change and if we are to do that and make a dent in our shameful social statistics we will have to change our paradigm. 
The deficit approach we have been operating from sees the 14-year-old girl with a long history of school truancy and disruptive behaviour puts her life under the risk assessment lens and discovers that there is no address on her school enrolment form. There is no dad at home and her mum is known to be an addict by mental health providers. The girl is performing well below her peers academically. As we tease out the facts the picture looks gloomy and we wonder what hope there is for this girl. 
However the strength-based approach looks at the same girl and discovers these facts: she has a younger 10-year-old brother for whom she is the main caregiver; she cooks tea each night; and when there is a shortage of food she reduces her portion so that her brother gets enough. She often misses school so that she can accompany her mother to a weekly outpatients’ programme with a community mental health provider that specialises in addictive behaviours. The girl will sit for hours waiting for her mother to finish the programme. She shops with her mother to make sure she does not get sidetracked on the way to the supermarket. She has a good relationship with an aunt so that she can relocate her brother and herself when her mum brings home unsafe men. She is very insistent that her brother attends school every day despite her own truancy record. These obvious strengths do not change the deficits but they do give us hope that with the right help these strengths can be built upon to create patterns of living whereby this 14-year-old along with her family may be empowered to make the gradual changes needed to shape a positive future. 
We are developing a culture of victimisation that focuses on rights and entitlements and to change this to a culture of responsibility and participation it will require the Government to shift its thinking from problem management to change management.