Forecasting vulnerable children

Simon Collins in NZ Herald reports:

An economist who has developed a mathematical method of predicting child abuse says it is about as accurate as a mammogram is in spotting breast cancer.

Auckland University associate professor Rhema Vaithianathan, who led a team that developed the technique for the Government’s white paper on vulnerable children, hopes it can be introduced through the country next year.

This could be incredibly useful. As I understand it, it applies all the known factors which increase prevalence of child abuse to identify those most at risk. This gives an opportunity to provide support and if necessary protection before it is too late.

Sri Lanka-born Dr Vaithianathan, 46, who came to New Zealand at the age of 7, has also written papers applying economic techniques to the “marriage market” for female genital mutilation in Africa and to the likelihood of patients who are admitted to New Zealand hospitals being readmitted in the following year.

The three Auckland health boards are using her hospital formula to tell family doctors how likely their patients are to be readmitted.

Professor Vaithianathan contested the Labour nomination for Parliament in the 2009 Mt Albert byelection, won by David Shearer, but she said she was happy to do research for the National Government.

“I think New Zealand is too small, and our problems are too grave, for partisanship.”

A view not shared by Jacinda Ardern it seems, who called it a “dodgy” tool from Auckland University.

Her team found that children born between January 2003 and June 2006 whose parents were on welfare at some point in their first two years accounted for 83 per cent of total New Zealand substantiated findings of abuse or neglect of children under 5 during the subsequent five years.

The rate of substantiated abuse or neglect in children on welfare (13 per cent) was almost 10 times the 1.4 per cent rate in families that were never on welfare in those five years.

Which is why reducing the number of families on long-term welfare (excepting those absolutely incapable of work) is so important. Note that 87% of families on welfare do not have child abuse issues, so this not about demonising all families on welfare. Most do an excellent job in difficult circumstances. But to have one in seven families on welfare with substantiated abuse is far far too high.