Auckland University of Technology has unreservedly apologised to a former academic turned Australian MP for its botched handling of her complaint regarding sexual harassment by a former staff member.

Dr Marisa Paterson was director of Australian National University’s Centre for Gambling Research in 2020 when she publicly accused internationally-respected gambling expert Max Abbott of stalking and harassing her.

He stepped down as dean of the School of Health and Environmental Sciences​ after the story was aired by the news organisation Stuff. He later resigned as a professor.

• READ MORE: Dr Marisa Paterson, who previously revealed she was sexually harassed, reaches settlement with New Zealand university
• The 2021 Davenport report into harassment and sexual harassment at AUT

In a joint statement with the university issued through the Office of the Human Rights Proceedings today, Dr Paterson, now a Member of the ACT Legislative Assembly, said she made the complaint because she wanted the harmful behaviour to stop and for the situation to be investigated.

“My desperation in lodging a formal complaint was extreme — my career was everything to me and I knew that making a complaint would have significant implications. The independent report that was commissioned by AUT and this apology, are public recognition that I did not experience the appropriate or adequate response to the harm I experienced.”

Dr Paterson said in addition to the sexual harassment, she suffered “long-term distress and implications” from having to fight an institution for an adequate response.

“But today, what I went through is being publicly recognised. And my voice today is being heard — most importantly by AUT. It is accounted for and it is being recognised as an equal through this joint statement. My statement today is not one of forgiveness. This is a public step in leadership.

“This can never happen again.”

‘Poor investigation’
Chancellor Rob Campbell said AUT offered its unreserved apology to Dr Paterson for its poor investigation into her complaint and lack of communication through the process.

“We would also like to recognise your courage in coming forward, and to thank you for providing the opportunity for AUT to learn from this and initiate a process of culture change which we are confident will improve the experience of people learning and working in the university,” he said.

“We hope that our actions will be viewed as reflecting a survivor-centred approach and positive shift in institutional culture.

“We trust that this genuine apology will support you in your pathway forward.”

He said the university was already working to respond the 36 recommendations in the independent review, including the development of a stand-alone sexual harassment policy, a new three tier complaints process, and training for all managers.

The Office of the Human Rights Proceedings said the apology and joint statement was a positive outcome for both sides.

‘Absolute tenacity’
Director Michael Timmons said it reflected “Dr Paterson’s absolute tenacity and her strength in accessing justice for what happened to her”.

“But it also shows AUT has acknowledged what has happend to her and is publicly holding themselves to account.”

He conceded the outcome had been a long time coming.

In an interview with the ABC in Australia, Dr Paterson said: “I am feeling vindicated. I feel that today there has been some justice served. This has been many years in the making for me, and I think that this is a big day for human rights and for women.”

Dr Paterson first laid a complaint with the Human Rights Commission in November 2021 but it was not resolved.

Mid-way through this year, she contacted the Office of the Human Rights Proceedings, which is responsible for providing publicly-funded representation to complainants taking legal action under the Human Rights Act.

Timmons said the settlement has avoided the need for further legal proceedings.

“This case is really important because it says to big institutions, particularly tertiary institutions, that they have firm obligations under the Human Rights Act for the actions of their staff.”

Max Abbott’s name was not mentioned in the apology or statement as the case only concerned AUT’s actions, he said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Most people welcomed the opportunity to get vaccinated against covid-19, yet a non-trivial minority did not. Vaccine-resistant people tend to hold strong views and assertively reject conventional medical or public health recommendations.

This is puzzling to many, and the issue has become a flashpoint in several countries.

It has resulted in strained relationships, even within families, and at a macro-level has threatened social cohesion, such as during the month-long protest on Parliament grounds in Wellington, New Zealand.

• READ MORE: Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy can be overcome through relatable stories and accessible information
• The 9 psychological barriers that lead to covid-19 vaccine hesitancy and refusal
• 5 strategies to prepare now for the next pandemic

This raises the question: where do these strong, often visceral anti-vaccination sentiments spring from? As lifecourse researchers we know that many adult attitudes, traits and behaviours have their roots in childhood.

This insight prompted us to enquire about vaccine resistance among members of the long-running Dunedin Study, which marks 50 years this month.

Specifically, we surveyed study members about their vaccination intentions between April and July 2021, just prior to the national vaccine roll out which began in New Zealand in August 2021. Our findings support the idea that anti-vaccination views stem from childhood experiences.

The Dunedin Study, which has followed a 1972-73 birth cohort, has amassed a wealth of information on many aspects of the lives of its 1037 participants, including their physical health and personal experiences as well as long-standing values, motives, lifestyles, information-processing capacities and emotional tendencies, going right back to childhood.

Almost 90 percent of the Dunedin Study members responded to our 2021 survey about vaccination intent. We found 13 pecent of our cohort did not plan to be vaccinated (with similar numbers of men and women).

When we compared the early life histories of those who were vaccine resistant to those who were not we found many vaccine-resistant adults had histories of adverse experiences during childhood, including abuse, maltreatment, deprivation or neglect, or having an alcoholic parent.

These experiences would have made their childhood unpredictable and contributed to a lifelong legacy of mistrust in authorities, as well as seeding the belief that “when the proverbial hits the fan you’re on your own”.

Our findings are summarised in this figure.

Personality tests at age 18 showed people in the vaccine-resistant group were vulnerable to frequent extreme emotions of fear and anger. They tended to shut down mentally when under stress.

They also felt fatalistic about health matters, reporting at age 15 on a scale called “health locus of control” that there is nothing people can do to improve their health. As teens they often misinterpreted situations by unnecessarily jumping to the conclusion they were being threatened.

The resistant group also described themselves as non-conformists who valued personal freedom and self-reliance over following social norms. As they grew older, many experienced mental health problems characterised by apathy, faulty decision-making and susceptibility to conspiracy theories.

Negative emotions combine with cognitive difficulties
To compound matters further, some vaccine-resistant study members had cognitive difficulties since childhood, along with their early-life adversities and emotional vulnerabilities. They had been poor readers in high school and scored low on the study’s tests of verbal comprehension and processing speed.

These tests measure the amount of effort and time a person requires to decode incoming information.

Such longstanding cognitive difficulties would certainly make it difficult for anyone to comprehend complicated health information under the calmest of conditions. But when comprehension difficulties combine with the extreme negative emotions more common among vaccine-resistant people, this can lead to vaccination decisions that seem inexplicable to health professionals.

Today, New Zealand has achieved a very high vaccination rate (95 percent of those eligible above the age of 12), which is approximately 10 percent higher than in England, Wales, Scotland or Ireland and 20 percent higher than in the US.

More starkly, the New Zealand death rate per million population is currently 71. This compares favourably to other democracies such as the US with 2,949 deaths per million (40 times New Zealand’s rate), UK at 2,423 per million (34 times) and Canada at 991 per million (14 times).

How to overcome vaccine resistance
How then do we reconcile our finding that 13 percent of our cohort were vaccine resistant and the national vaccination rate now sits at 95 percent? There are a number of factors that helped drive the rate this high.

They include:

• Good leadership and clear communication from both the prime minster and director-general of health
• leveraging initial fear about the arrival of new variants, delta and omicron
• widespread implementation of vaccine mandates and border closure, both of which have become increasingly controversial
• the devolution by government of vaccination responsibilities to community groups, particularly those at highest risk such as Māori, Pasifika and those with mental health challenges.

A distinct advantage of the community-driven approach is that it harnesses more intimate knowledge about people and their needs, thereby creating high(er) trust for decision-making about vaccination.

This is consistent with our findings which highlight the importance of understanding individual life histories and different ways of thinking about the world – which are both attributable to adversities experienced by some people early in life. This has the added benefit of encouraging a more compassionate view towards vaccine resistance, which might ultimately translate into higher rates of vaccine preparedness.

For many, the move from a one-size-fits-all approach occurred too slowly and this is an important lesson for the future. Another lesson is that achieving high vaccination rates has not been free of “cost” to individuals, families and communities. It has been a struggle to persuade many citizens to get vaccinated and it would be unrealistic not to expect some residual resentment or anger among those most heavily affected by these decisions.

Preparing for the next pandemic
Covid-19 is unlikely to be the last pandemic. Recommendations about how governments should prepare for future pandemics often involve medical technology solutions such as improvements in testing, vaccine delivery and treatments, as well as better-prepared hospitals.

Other recommendations emphasise economic solutions such as a world pandemic fund, more resilient supply chains and global coordination of vaccine distribution. The contribution of our research is the appreciation that citizens’ vaccine resistance is a lifelong psychological style of misinterpreting information during crisis situations that is laid down before high school age.

We recommend that national preparation for future pandemics should include preventive education to teach school children about virus epidemiology, mechanisms of infection, infection-mitigating behaviours and vaccines. Early education can prepare the public to appreciate the need for hand-washing, mask-wearing, social distancing and vaccination.

Early education about viruses and vaccines could provide citizens with a pre-existing knowledge framework, reduce citizens’ level of uncertainty in a future pandemic, prevent emotional stress reactions and enhance openness to health messaging. Technology and money are two key tools in a pandemic-preparedness strategy, but the third vital tool should be a prepared citizenry.

The takeaway messages are twofold. First, do not scorn or belittle vaccine-resistant people, but rather attempt to glean a deeper understanding on “where they’re coming from” and try to address their concerns without judgement. This is best achieved by empowering the local communities that vaccine resisters are most likely to trust.

The second key insight points to a longer-term strategy that involves education about pandemics and the value of vaccinations in protecting the community. This needs to begin when children are young, and of course it must be delivered in an age-appropriate way. This would be wise simply because, when it comes to future pandemics, it’s not a matter of if, but when.

Dr Richie Poulton, CNZM FRSNZ, director of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Research Unit (DMHDRU), University of Otago; Dr Avshalom Caspi, professor, Duke University, and Dr Terrie Moffitt, Nannerl O. Keohane University Professor of Psychology, Duke University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva is the first Pacific person ever to be promoted to the highest professorial status of distinguished professor.

The award-winning Fiji-born University of Canterbury political sociologist was recognised for his global leadership and pioneering interdisciplinary research in a range of fields including ethnicity, security, politics, affirmative action, development, and social protection.

Director of UC’s Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies, he is a prolific author. In the last two years alone he has authored and edited five books, including a three-volume global project on ethnicity — the largest and most comprehensive on the subject.

• READ MORE: Steven Ratuva: Repression not the answer to Fiji’s political dilemma
• USP and Canterbury University partner for Pacific climate research

Among his academic leadership roles, he has led pioneering projects on global security in collaboration with international agencies such as the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) as chair of the International Political Science Association research committee on security, conflict and democratisation.

Dr Ratuva currently leads projects worth several million dollars and is co-leading a UC and University of the South Pacific joint project on climate crisis and resilience, covering 16 Pacific countries. The climate project is funded by the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

He is also leading a New Zealand Health Research Council-funded health and social protection project.

Last year, distinguished professor Ratuva was elected as a Fellow of the Royal Society Te Apārangi and won the society’s Mertge Medal for New Zealand social science research excellence.

In 2019, he won the University of Canterbury Research Medal and received a Senior Fulbright Fellowship in 2018 to conduct research on ethnicity and affirmative action with leading experts in the field at University of California, Duke University and Georgetown University.

Republished with permission.

Academics who made allegations of racism at the University of Waikato are welcoming the outcome of an independent review.

While individual claims have been dismissed as “inaccurate”, “incorrect” and “reflective of differing perspectives”, it is hoped the findings could lead to nationwide action on racism at tertiary institutions.

Six academics wrote to the Ministry of Education last month, expressing concerns about casual and structural racism at the University of Waikato – prompting the review.

• READ MORE: Support for academics over allegations of structural racism at Waikato University

The review was led by Harawira Gardiner and Hekia Parata, who held individual and group meetings with 80 people and received 96 submissions, and the findings were released yesterday.

Instead of upholding specific claims, it concluded that New Zealand’s public institutions, including universities, adhere to Western university traditions and cultures – so there was a case for structural, systemic, and casual discrimination.

“Today, in 2020, in this post-settlement world, it is not acceptable for places of teaching and learning, of research, scholarship and debate, of nation building, to continue this selectively accommodating patronage, of Māori, tāngata whenua, their mana, tikanga and mātauranga,” it said.

Delighted with outcome
Professor of Māori Education at Victoria University of Wellington Joanna Kidman – who has publically supported the six academics – says she was delighted with that outcome, and confirmation from the University of Waikato that it would set up a taskforce to “open up the dialogues” and tackle the issues.

“I think this will be a positive step forward… we will look towards the university to lead what could be a model for other universities in times to come,” she said.

However, she said the findings could also be put on a “national footing”.

“We’ve seen recently, a group of Māori professors have put an open letter to Education Minister Chris Hipkins saying that they would like an independent review of New Zealand universities. I think this is an excellent way forward.”

The report also recommended the university engaged in a future-focused process to determine how to apply the 1840 Treaty of Waitangi, and to refresh its relationships with iwi.

The University of Waikato declined to comment further on the report or speak to RNZ, but Vice-Chancellor Professor Neil Quigley posted a video statement saying the university council unanimously accepted the recommendations.

He said the taskforce would create an action plan over the next few months.

“This is an opportunity for the University of Waikato to provide leadership both here, and nationally, for the development of ideas that will address structural and systemic discrimination and racism in the university system,” he said.

“It’s going to be a difficult journey, a challenging journey, but we are committed to making it work.”

This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a partnership agreement with RNZ.

The covid-19 coronavirus pandemic and subsequent lockdown has been tough on the mental wellbeing of Asian New Zealanders, according to new research.

The New Zealand Asian Mental Health and Well-being report, commissioned by charity Asian Family Services, found high levels of anxiety and nervousness, as well as racism.

The research surveyed 580 Asian New Zealanders across the country and found almost 44 percent of them experienced some form of mental distress since level 4 lockdown.

READ MORE: Al Jazeera coronavirus live updates – Global death toll passes half a million

• PM Ardern on isolation issues – ‘We have to fix it’
• Two covid-19 cases on French Polynesian quarantine

Nervousness and anxiety are the most widely experienced (57 percent), followed by little interest or pleasure in doing things (55.2 percent), uncontrollable worrying (47.4 percent) and feeling down and hopeless (44 percent).

Asian Family Services director Kelly Feng said isolation, lack of support, family issues, academic or work pressure, new migrants adjusting to a new environment can all cause mental stress.

She said the findings correlate to what they were seeing on the ground.

“That’s quite true when over the lockdown, our service has also experienced high demand about emotional support and counselling services.”

Help primarily from friends
The report also finds that Asians primarily seek help from friends (44.1 percent) and family (42.6 percent), with just over a quarter (28.3 percent) saying they would see their doctor, comparing with the national figure of 69 percent according to the Health Promotion Agency.

A small portion (13.8 percent) did not seek any support at all, and Feng said it was concerning.

“That gives me an indication that we really need to promote or even do a campaign about mental wellbeing and addiction issues and raise awareness among Asian communities so people can seek help in the early stage and get a bit of early intervention rather than at the bottom of the cliff,” she said.

Just over 16 percent of respondents reported experiencing racial discrimination during the pandemic, and those who faced discrimination were also more likely to have mental health concerns.

Race Relations Commissioner Meng Foon said the findings were alarming.

“I feel gutted and sad that people are receiving discrimination and racism. It doesn’t matter what the numbers are. It’s really important that we continue to try and implement progress in systems and education to eliminate racism,” he said.

“It’s good to have an analysis report on mental health and discrimination. I think there’s a lot of work to do ahead of us. It’s good to know where we can actually target our resources to support mental health.”

Kindness message helped
The study said the overall messaging of being kind to one another during the pandemic has likely contributed to the relatively low percentage of discrimination.

But Dr Andrew Zhu, director of Trace Research which carried out the study, said it was still serious.

“On a percentage base, it’s relatively small which means we’re on the way to achieving racial harmony, however if you translate this number into a population-based number, that’s around 84,000 adult population of Asian ethnicity which could still be counted as serious,” he said.

Koreans reported to have experienced discrimination the most, with 30 percent of those surveyed saying they’ve been discriminated against, followed by Chinese at just over 22 percent.

However, Chinese accounted for nearly half of the overall discrimination cases as it has the largest population base among all Asian ethnicities.

Data for this study was collected online between May 22 and June 3, and quota sampling was used to ensure representativeness of all Asian ethnic groups according to the 2018 census of Asian adult population distribution.

This article is republished by the Pacific Media Centre under a partnership agreement with RNZ.