CHILD WELFARE

Southland Times, Issue 20202, 13 June 1927, Page 8

CHILD WELFARE

ADDRESS BY BRANCH SUPERINTENDENT. Addressing members of the Wellington branch of the National Council of Women, Mr J. Beck, superintendent of the Child Welfare branch of the Education Department, gave an interesting account of the work of the branch and briefly traced the history of that section of the child welfare movement, dealing with destitute, delinquent, neglected and uncontrollable children. For nearly 45 years prior to the passage of the Child Welfare Act, in 1925, no new legislation had been framed for dealing with these special cases of children, although the methods in vogue in these early years had been changed from time to time, much on the same lines as the changes that were taking place in other countries. During the past 20 years for instance, there had been marked changes, such as the establishment of small receiving homes, the extension of the cbildplacing system, and the trial of the system providing for preliminary inquiry by experienced officers regarding the conduct, home conditions, and family history of children coming before the courts, and for the supervision, at the direction of the Court, of the majority of such children in their own homes in preference to admission to an institution. For the temporary housing of urgent cases and for cases requiring mild disciplinary treatment, it was necessary to establish small homes for boys in each of the four centres; but on the other hand it was found possible to close down three large institutions and materially reduce the numbers maintained in two others. The repeal of the Industrial School Act in 1925, and the substitution of the Child Welfare Act provided for the establishment of a child welfare branch and for the appointment of the superintendent of the branch as the legal guardian of all the children under the control of the State. Previously, the manager of the Industrial School was the legal guardian of such children. Provision was also made for the appointment of child welfare officers, both men and women. Prior to the legal recognition of these welfare officers only a policeman could bring a child before the Court. The child welfare officer acted as a connecting link with parents. It was not the wish of the department to separate children from their parents; and wherever it was possible children were left in their own homes under friendly supervision. Indeed, only in special circumstances were children taken from their homes. For children with no serious anti-social tendencies foster homes were found, and about 2000 children were boarded out throughout New Zealand under the supervision of women welfare officers, the majority of whom were trained nurses. The welfare of each child was watched closely in every way, and at the age of 14 or 15 the best course to adopt for its future welfare was finally considered, the department seeing the child through until it became self-support-ing. The Child Welfare Act, provided the necessary legal machinery for the establishment of Children’s Courts. That machinery compared favourably with that efiacted in other countries. The Act specially provided for privacy in these courts which, as far as practicable, are not to be held in any rooms used for other courts. Only specially authorised persons are entitled to attend the children’s court. Although in some ways it was proving somewhat difficult to effect the necessary changes from the old order of things in the matter of procedure, yet it was hoped that the critics would have patience and refrain from indulging in criticism that might be harmful. Data was now being collected by the Child Welfare branch in connection with the regulation of street trading and in regard to the. debatable question of children and picture shows, and the department would welcome considered opinions from the National Council of Women which would also be of great help in educating public opinion on the subject. Mr Beck said that the death-rate of illegitimate children was far too high, and that was a question which the National Council of Women might also investigate, especially from the point of view of the legal status of the child. Often such children were placed in unsuitable homes, and were not under any efficient supervision. Such children were not only handicapped socially but legally as well. Even the adjudged father had no legal rights. There should probably be provision for the State to assume the guardianship of illegitimate children in certain types of cases, but this should be done only through the Children’s Courts. The department realised that co-ordina-tion of and co-operation with private social service organisations was essential for the purpose of preventing overlapping and for the purpose of adopting uniform standards in child welfare work. Round-table conferences between representatives of the department and interested organisations were desirable. The Y.M.C.A. “big brother” mover ment was doing excellent constructive work, and rarely had a failure, and he hoped to see some day a “big sister” movement inaugurated. Mr Beck thought that there should be some system of training social workers in New Zealand as in other parts of the world. Provision already existed for the educating of retardate children in special classes in the ordinary public school. For children of backward intelligence who could not be trusted to attend such classes, and where the homes were unsatisfactory, it was necessary to provide residential special schools. At present there were two such schools, one near Oamaru for boys and the other near Nelson for girls. At the conclusion of his address, Mr Beck was accorded a hearty vote of thanks, on the motion of the Dominion president (Mrs Fraer), Miss England, the president of the branch (Mrs Henry Smith), supplementing their eulogistic references.