‘My daughter is a drug addict’: grandparents caring for the children of addicted parents

ABSTRACT

This article reports on one aspect of a large multi-method survey of grandparents raising grandchildren, carried out in 2016. The research report [Gordon L. (2016). The empty nest is refilled: the joys and tribulations of grandparents raising grandchildren in New Zealand. Auckland: Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust (NZ)] notes that the most commonly cited reason for children coming into care was parental drug addiction. This article reports on the circumstances and well-being of families where parental drug addiction was cited as a reason for the children living with grandparents. Common causes of grandparents struggling to care for their grandchildren were personal health issues, housing, financial problems and dealing with traumatised or unwell children. Contact with parents was often random, with non-contact caused by parental death, imprisonment, parents moving away or re-forming families, children not wanting to see the parent or parents not turning up for scheduled visits. As noted in another article [Gordon L. (2017). Experiences of grandparents raising grandchildren in getting income support from Work and Income offices in New Zealand. Kotuitui. 12(2):134–145], many of the families had difficulty getting income support from Work and Income. Many of the children suffer from a range of emotional and behavioural problems, leading to concerns about their future. The conclusion considers the policy and service implications of these findings, in the context of the growing ‘epidemic’ of methamphetamines and other drug use in Aotearoa.

KEYWORDS:

• Drug addiction
• social policy
• grandparents raising grandchildren
• child well-being

New Zealand research studies carried out over more than a decade show that the most prevalent reason for grandchildren going to live with their grandparents is drug addiction (Worrall 2009, Gordon 2016). Similar patterns are found in research in other countries, such as Australia (Baldock 2007), the United States (Longoria 2010) and the United Kingdom (Gautier et al. 2012). The relationship between a drug habit and parenting is complex, as Baldock (2007, p. 70) explains:

A parent who misuses alcohol or other drugs is not necessarily unfit to look after children. However, alcohol and drug misuse frequently conflicts with a child’s need for care.

Broadhurst et al. (2015) note that the relationship between drug addiction and the removal of children into care is a complex one, with patterns of repeat pregnancy caused by loss and grief often affecting the potential for rehabilitation. There is very little literature on how parental drug addiction affects either children, or the grandparent carers. Smaller studies (Baldock 2007) allow for a qualitative exploration of some of the issues affecting family members. The role of larger studies, such as that reported here, is to enable an in-depth exploration of the data to understand how parental drug addiction affects the role of grandparents as carers, and the health and well-being of the children. Studies of this group are important because the number of grandparent carers has been growing quite quickly, in New Zealand and other countries (Backhouse and Graham, 2012; Glaser et al. 2013; Kresak et al. 2014). The 2013 census reported 9543 families raising grandchildren, with earlier figures not available. Of these, more than half were reported to be in deprivation decile 8, 9 or 10, the poorest 30% of families/whanau (see Gordon 2016 for a full report on the census findings).

In 2016, the organisation Grandparents Raising Grandchildren Trust (New Zealand) conducted a piece of research examining a range of issues around caring for their grandchildren. The mammoth questionnaire included 152 questions and numerous opportunities for qualitative responses. It was offered online, over the phone, face to face or in written format. Ethical approval was granted through the University of Canterbury Human Ethics Committee. The overall data were analysed in a report (Gordon 2016), which is available online. The questionnaire was completed by in excess of 850 whanau/families who cared for 1325 children.

This large study provided significant quantitative and qualitative data that were able to investigate a number of questions in depth. Papers already completed or underway (with completion in 2017 or 2018) include the experience of grandparents in getting financial support through Work and Income (Gordon 2017), grandparents looking after babies and very young children, great-grandparent carers, the economic issues around caring for grandchildren, Māori grandparents raising grandchildren and when parents are in prison.

In 2005 and 2009, previous New Zealand research (Worrall 2009) found that drug addiction was the most common reason for children coming into grandparent care. In the 2016 study, drug addiction was still the most common reason, with 44% of children coming into care at least partly for that reason. The percentages of the ‘top six’ reasons in the overall sample are outlined in Table 1 (taken from Gordon 2016, Figure 38).

Table 1. Top six reasons for children coming into grandparent care (multiple responses) % of total children.

Reason	% of total children in sample
Drug addiction	44
Domestic violence	40
Family breakdown	39
Neglect	39
Parent unable to cope	38
Alcohol abuse	25

In the 2016 study, 578 of the 1325 children came into care partly or fully as a result of parental drug addiction, as indicated by the grandparent carers. This article seeks to outline, via quantitative and qualitative analyses, what particular issues and pressures affect the families when drug addiction is the main reason for children living with their grandparents. Three main areas will be considered: how parental drug addiction leads to children coming into grandparent care; the effects in the short and longer term on grandparent carers; and information on the children’s well-being, health, education and other factors.

Drug use as a reason for grandparents raising grandchildren

Most research participants did not specify which drugs were the cause of the addiction that led to the children coming into grandparent care. The most cited drug by far was methamphetamine, or ‘meth’, or P (as it is usually known in New Zealand), but mentioned by less than 20 participants. Other drugs cited included cannabis, synthetic cannabis, cocaine and propane gas. The existence of drug use alone rarely constituted a reason for the child coming into care; it was multiple factors that led to this outcome. Of the 34 (out of 578) cases that cited only drug addiction as a reason, in fact multiple other reasons were noted in qualitative comments: ‘Mother was in an abusive relationship’; ‘dysfunctional lifestyle’; ‘psychotic episode as a result of P’; ‘breakdown between parents’; ‘child being left with every Tom Dick and Harry as the parents went out smoking and boozing’ and so on. In several cases also, parents approached the grandparents to take on the child because they could not cope, or so that they could seek treatment.

In most cases, though, things deteriorated over a period of time as a result of the drug use (and other factors), leading to the situation where the care of the children was endangered. In qualitative comments, many of the grandparents described this deterioration:

Mother and boyfriend broke up, mother turned to drugs, father lost a few marbles sniffing propane gas. They left him with us while they did their stuff, father did not want him and mother ended up in gang and then jail.

The ranking of reasons, listed as a proportion (%) of total reasons, that are co-morbid with drug addiction, is outlined in Figure 2 below. These can be read as overall percentages; thus 63% of the grandparents noted that drug-addicted parents also experienced domestic violence as a reason for their children going into care. Compared to the overall sample, three reasons are over-represented as co-morbidities in the drug addiction group: domestic violence, neglect and alcohol addiction. The latter was particularly over-represented: four out of five of those noted to have alcohol addictions also exhibited drug addictions.

Over the whole ‘drugs’ group, on average 4.5 reasons were given per child for the children coming into grandparent care, compared with 3.2 reasons on average across the whole study, meaning that parents (and their children) involved in drugs also had a larger number of issues. Quite commonly the list of factors would read something like: ‘Drug addiction, neglect, domestic violence, alcohol addiction’. Additional common factors were family breakdown, mental illness of a parent, parent unable to cope or very young parents. Some of these factors, such as child abuse, are signalled as significant in the literature (e.g. De Bortoli et al. 2014).

The full list of reasons, by the proportion of total drug addiction as a reason, is listed in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Reasons for coming into grandparent care as a percentage of ‘drug addiction’ reasons, n = 579.

Reason	% of drug addiction
Domestic violence	63.32
Neglect	55.71
Alcohol addiction	47.4
Family breakdown	46.71
Parent unable to cope	39.45
Mental illness of the parent	24.05
Child abuse	20.42
Abandonment	17.47
Parental imprisonment	17.3
Very young parent	13.84
Physical illness of parent	3.46
Death of a parent	3.11

It should be noted that Table 2 relates to a particular moment in time: the point at which a child or children comes into grandparent care. It does not encompass any subsequent life course events.

Nearly two out of three citing drug addiction as a reason also cited domestic violence (63% compared with 40% in the overall findings). Some of the qualitative comments note serious levels of violence, in some cases gang-related. The account below shows drugs and violence within the family, with significant consequences.

[Child] was put in my care by the Court as both her parents were considered to be unable to provide a healthy, stable and safe home environment for her. Mother has drug addiction problems and the father was recently incarcerated awaiting trial for family violence … 

The second most frequent reason for children going into grandparent care among the drug addiction group was neglect, at 56% (compared to 39% of the overall findings). The term neglect spanned many sets of behaviours, from ‘not attending to any of the child’s needs’, ‘never had food at school’, ‘put the child in unhealthy and dangerous situations’, ‘sick and covered in sores’, ‘I turned up to see mokos and mother had just sold my granddaughter to another person’, and a number of instances in which the child had been left with others for extended periods of time. In many cases these children ended up being removed the grandparent or by Child, Youth and Family (CYF), as in the following instance:

Mother could not cope with doing her basic needs and was indulging in illegal drugs and alcohol, her child was not receiving basic needs and was living with a verbally abusive mum, the child was removed by me and her aunt. CYF was very slow to take any action while the child has to stay in her room and be constantly screamed at. Also, she was not being taken to school and if she was lucky enough to be allowed to attend was always late as could not wake her mum.

The co-location of drug and alcohol addiction occurred in 47% of instances, and was cited as ‘sole’ reasons in five situations. In these cases, issues such as driving while intoxicated, an admission to hospital which revealed the extent of addiction problems and grandmother intervention: ‘I took him off her’ were cited. Some of the children were diagnosed with alcohol or drug-related conditions:

Mum was not coping with sending the twins to school. they were unwell and very skinny. Mum admitted in court to using ‘P’. The twins are both FAS [Foetal Alcohol Syndrome]. I applied by ‘without notice’ to the Family Court and after over a year they are now permanently with me.

Family breakdown also occurred in 47% of the drug addiction cases. The effects of family breakdown on large families were often significant:

Family breakdown, CYFs involvement. We were asked to take on 4 children but were unable, other family members took the 3 siblings. We had been constantly rescuing all children and had been providing food and clothing for most of their lives. [Child] had spent considerable time with us even while in his mother’s care … Major family problems were drugs, alcohol, violence, gang involvement, neglect etc.

The last of the most common co-morbidities was parents who were unable to cope. The lack of coping arose from multiple issues, some of which were linked to the drug addictions: ‘daughter had a psychotic episode from drug abuse and was not capable of looking after her son’. Others had prior issues that made it hard to cope, such as: ‘Mother beautiful young girl, child prostitute at 10, huge mental illness and addictions’. In other cases, parents were unable to cope with a child that had difficulties, such as ‘foetal alcohol and autism’. In this category also, a number of parents recognised they were having difficulty and voluntarily handed the child over to the grandparent: ‘the mother thrust him into my arms and said “take him and love him”. Drugs really … and mess’. In a number of other cases, the grandparent simply went and uplifted the child to keep it safe. Often this kind of intervention was unplanned and sometimes led to a fairly abrupt change in life circumstances for the grandparent:

Mother addicted to methamphetamine, father struggling with alcohol and gambling addictions and father left baby with me one day. I ended up retiring from work before I wanted to.

A quarter of the co-morbid reasons given related to parental mental illness. The qualitative data on these cases demonstrate a mix of mental illness leading to drug addiction, or drugs leading to mental illness: ‘My daughter was addicted to P and with that came mental issues and constant suicide attempts’, and a mix of both impacting on care of the children:

Signs of unwellness were already showing with her mother. The children were having to fend for themselves, i.e. feeding themselves, putting themselves to sleep whenever they felt like it, trying to cope at school with no input at home. Mother was unwilling to admit help for her unwellness. She was also inviting male company into the home who gave me reason to feel very unsafe for both my daughter and grandchildren.

The ‘child abuse’ and ‘abandonment’ co-morbidities often came out of a very similar space, such as the following example:

Parents continual fighting and abuse of each other, constant drug abuse by both parents, police involvement, neither parent can obtain or retain a home to live in now. Mother dropped child off with a box of clothes and left her.

The final group of co-morbidities includes young parents, imprisonment, parental illness and parental death. Prisoners are over-represented in the ‘drug addiction’ subsample, with two-thirds of the prisoner parents cited as addicted to drugs. In some cases, parents were in prison for dealing drugs to fuel their own addiction: ‘mother going to prison for P sales’; ‘this is his second prison term for theft/burglary/fraud/manufacturing P/firearms etc. to support his habit’; ‘My daughter continued to sell and use and then ended up in jail.’

Finally, some of the parental deaths were also linked to drug use, including several suicides and drug-induced illnesses. In other cases, the death of one parent triggered drug use in the other: ‘Father passed away, mother ended up on drugs.’

The main conclusion from this part of the article is that the existence of multiple co-morbidities demonstrates that addiction to drugs is rarely the sole trigger for grandchildren going into grandparent care. There are patterns of factors, some of which stem from the drug use and others which are relatively independent from it. The strong links between drugs and violence, neglect and alcohol addiction indicate some of the dangers in parenting with a drug addiction. Many of the stories indicate dramatic and damaging family circumstances from which the children were taken.

The grandparent families

The 578 children reported to have come into care partially or wholly because of parental drug addiction went into 396 grandparent families. The families currently look after between one and five children:

I am lucky that I only look after one child that is a teenager, has been a drain on my resources and health.

It’s certainly a full-time job. I wish I had more time to myself but with 5 kids and no partner it’s just not possible.

The families looking after the children of drug-addicted parents have similar ethnic characteristics as the overall grandparent group. Māori make up 34% of the ‘drug’ grandparents, almost exactly the same proportion as the overall sample (the 2013 census figure of all grandparent families estimates 39% are Māori, reported in Gordon 2016). NZ European is 57% and there are also Samoan, Nuiean, Cook Islander, Chinese and Tongan families represented in the ‘drug’ group, along with English, Scottish, South African, other African and Canadian families. In short, the ethnic representation mirrors the wider grandparent group closely.

National data indicate Māori are around three times more likely to use meth (Ministry of Health 2016), and this may help to account for the over-representation of Māori families among grandparent carers (39%, compared with an expected 15–18%, Gordon 2016), but within the grandparent as carer population Māori are no more likely than other groups to be caring for children as a result of drug addictions.

Grandparents were asked how they were coping with caring for the children. Compared to the total sample, the grandparents caring for the children of drug addicts were slightly less likely to be managing well or very well, and slightly more likely to be struggling. Those managing very well are ‘so pleased to have been able to help’, find it ‘character-building (ours not theirs!!)’ and ‘love it. But wouldn’t do it again’ or ‘I wish we could have had more.’ The joy is not unmitigated: ‘As you got older it gets harder – teenage years are very difficult’.

At the other end of the scale, those struggling daily cite ‘health problems’, ‘home is inadequate’, ‘exhausting, isolating’, ‘financial issues’, ‘if we can’t afford food, I miss out’, relationship problems such as ‘it has disrupted our life and compromised our relationship’ and other comments such as: ‘I will die young … stressed to max.’

One person noted:

I have very, very little support and have been quite ill over the years so it is very, very challenging financially, emotionally, spiritually and mentally – we struggle terribly financially.

Figure 1 outlines the distribution of percentage responses relating to grandparents self-reported coping with bringing up grandchildren who have a drug-addicted parent.

Figure 1. Self-rated level of coping (%), ‘drugs’ sub-group (n = 350 grandparents).

A question that arises is to what extent the pressures that the grandparents face come from the particular circumstances of the child’s parents. Some address this with comments like: ‘the children are the easier part – it is dealing with the parents that can be difficult’, or ‘went through some really horrible times with his birth family’, or ‘It is hard not to feel resentful towards the children’s parents for putting us all in this position and that is not a healthy emotion to have’. Quite a number of parents have had additional children since the grandparents have taken on the care of others, a pattern described by Broadhurst et al. (2015) as a partial result of repeat losses of children. But most of the pressures discussed by grandparents relate to financial, personal health, personal/relationship matters or the needs of the children. While some report difficult interactions through the court system or personally, only a small number refer to drug addiction by itself making things worse.

The pattern of access visits with mothers in the drugs sample is similar to the overall findings, with ‘randomly’ being the most common choice, followed by weekly. These findings are outlined in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Frequency of visits with mother, excluding ‘other’ responses, drug group.

However, 132 responses to this question explained a range of other factors affecting access to mothers. These included the death of the mother, imprisonment, the mother living away from the children, children choosing not to see mother, the mother has disappeared or that she does not turn up for scheduled visits. Many of the ‘other’ reasons given also mention ongoing addiction problems, and/or lifestyle choices, of the mothers.

Some children used to have access visits with their mothers but no longer do so. In one case, the children used to visit their mother in prison, but ‘since mother’s release from prison the girls have not seen their mother’. For another child, ‘every time she contacted or seen [sic] him, his behaviour would go downhill – everyone noticed it’. When asked, the boy chose not to see his mother anymore. Other children are kept away from their mothers because (in the words of one grandmother): ‘is methamphetamine addict and gang member’. One mother had access rights every week on Saturdays, but she simply stopped attending and ‘she last saw or had contact in 2008’.

Some mothers do maintain contact by telephone or by social media. The ability to send messages by Facebook and other means is of concern in some families:

When she is drunk or drugged out of her mind she uses electronic media to contact him in the middle of the night and abuse my name and telling him to toughen up and go back to ‘The Bros’.

Ninety of the fathers see their child either daily, weekly or monthly, and a further 76 visit randomly. The largest group (115) never see their child. In the ‘other’ group, fathers are in prison, deceased, mentally ill, deny paternity, live far away or have started new families. Some fathers are not allowed access due to violence, drugs or (in one case) molesting his daughter. Many of the fathers have difficulty maintaining ongoing relationships with their children, as in this story where a number of factors were in play:

He died in an accident apparently, 3 months ago. Up until then, he made contact by letter or phone, maybe once every 1–2 years. His name is not on the birth certificate, so there is no proof that he actually was the father. I have tried to protect the child from any possible hurt or disappointment, as his criminal record and lifestyle were undesirable.

Among the pressures noted by grandparent families are financial difficulties. These can arise from changes in employment patterns (having to reduce hours, change jobs or leave work completely), changes in the living situation including increased housing and living spending, or costs relating to taking on the children. Comments include: ‘I feel guilty that they have to miss out on a lot because of our financial situation’; ‘She comes before me. If we can’t afford food, I miss out’; and ‘Just managing. There is not enough support financially.’

One grandparent summed up themes discussed by many others when she wrote:

The life I had planned has disappeared. The things I used to be able to do often I do very little now. The disposable income is gone; the retirement savings are gone; the middle income is now the low income. Our small house is now too small. What free time? what friends? The outcome – two children who were on their way to being broken are repaired, happy and doing extremely well.

Since 2009, kin carers have had access to a non-means-tested benefit known as the Unsupported Child Benefit (UCB). The UCB is a payment that provides material assistance to grandparents raising grandchildren, and helps compensate for additional costs, housing, children’s needs and other expenses. The eligibility criteria for the UCB set a high bar, with grandparents needing to show that they are likely to be caring for the child for at least 12 months, and that the child has come into care as a result of a breakdown in family relationships. A separate paper has been published specifically on the topic of getting access to the UCB (Gordon 2017). With the state support agency ‘Work and Income’ requiring evidence of both elements, some carers wait a long time and have to go through complex processes to satisfy these criteria in practice. Grandparents taking on grandchildren often face a range of difficulties in satisfying Work and Income that they meet the criteria.

For example, one grandparent took on the care of a child to support a parent into rehabilitation. With the assumption that the process would take weeks or months, and that the child would then return to the parent, the grandparent was not eligible for the UCB. However, the 12 months soon passed and the child was still in care. In some cases, the uncertainties arising from this and other similar scenarios can lead to years of delay in receiving the UCB, and associated financial hardship: ‘we did get it in the end … ’, ‘got it eventually’, ‘It took years to get it – I missed out on a lot’, ‘It took them ten years to give me the UCB!!!!.’ Some people took a long time to get it, and some of these eventually got back pay (but others did not):

I followed their process, had court papers, they still wouldn’t give me UCB. It took 3 years of fighting before I received it with back pay and an apology from Work and Income.

Not everyone had difficulty, and a number of people reported that Work and Income were co-operative and helpful, and provided the UCB from the start. In a twist to the difficulties some people faced, one woman got immediate support because her daughter was on drugs:

They mentioned the 12-month rule but when I told them my daughter was doing P they accepted my application.

In the quote below, one person did not let her long struggle to get support interfere with the joys of bringing up her grandchildren:

It has been a very long struggle bringing up my grandchildren, but I would never change a thing that I have endured – they are my grandchildren and I love them all, I couldn’t imagine them being brought up in the CYF [Child, Youth and Family] system … I raised them on my own. I have just been paid a lump sum pay-out from 2011 to 2015, I am now receiving Unsupported Child support which is a great help for my grandchildren and myself. I am hoping to get a lump sum pay-out backdated to 2006 when I first got my five grandchildren.

This section of the article reveals that grandparents often take on the care of children in difficult and sometimes catastrophic circumstances, which can immensely affect their own life plans and lifestyles. They may have to give up work, move house, move onto a fixed income, pay out additional costs, often with now support at all from the parents. Many of the parents are simply absent. Quite often too, support from the state to which most of them are entitled is not forthcoming in a timely manner, if at all (see also Gordon 2017).

How are the children doing?

In nearly all cases, the children arrived in grandparent care from difficult circumstances at home. Many were neglected, many were witness to (and in some cases victims of) domestic violence and some had been through the hands of many carers in the past:

He has lived between his mother and us all his life. He was sick a lot and neglected, we’d get him better in weekends and he’d get worse again. CYF did an assessment, he was placed in foster care, this was worse, he was abused. I complained and he was moved to another carer, which was even worse than before. In the end, his mother picked him up and brought him to us.

In a number of cases, the children went into grandparent care as babies, which caused a different set of issues associated with the high dependency of babies, often crisis circumstances and a lack of preparedness. One grandparent noted that the ‘Father brought him to us because him [sic] and the mother were on drugs and we got him at 6 hours old’. The shock of having to take on a baby, with no notice at all, was only made worse by having to scramble for bedding, clothing, food and the necessities of baby life. However, as another grandparent noted, at least when the child arrives as a baby, the grandparents get to parent before the child can be damaged by an adverse environment.

Many of the children arrived into their grandparents’ care in a physically or emotionally damaged state, some living in an alphabet soup of psychological problems.

His diagnoses are AS, they wrote this as ‘features of’ AS but he is definitely high functioning Autism Spectrum, ADHD, ODD, GDD and some FAS¹. He has other issues that are not diagnosed separately but are included as behaviour issues under the headings of the diagnosis he has. Conduct Disorder has not been formally diagnosed yet but it is obvious he has that, and in my … opinion, he will be a sexual threat to the community in the future.

The pattern differs between the various types of illness. By count, emotional and behavioural problems are far more frequent than physical and mental illness. For example, three-quarters of the children never have symptoms of mental illness, whereas only a quarter never have emotional problems. The most common problem to occur ‘all’ or ‘most’ of the time is behavioural followed by emotional. A small cluster of 20 children experiences mental, emotional and behavioural problems most or all of the time. The most common diagnoses for those 20 are FASD, ADHD, ODD and Attachment Disorder, with most showing elements of violent or destructive behaviour. While the link between the use of alcohol during pregnancy and a range of developmental outcomes is well established (Jacobsen et al. 1993), the evidence of teratogenic links with methamphetamine, cannabis or synthetic cannabis is less so. Findings (e.g. Cardwell (2014) and Good et al. (2010)) indicate a range of potential effects, ranging from low birth weight to repetitive and unnecessary neurodevelopmental abnormalities (American College of Obstetricians 2011). The relatively large count of behavioural and emotional problems (and associated stories) among these children might be the result of such effects, but it would take a much closer-in study to demonstrate this.

Participants were also asked whether the child had any psychological diagnoses. This is important because access to treatment and educational support is often dependent on a professional diagnosis. To an extent the answer depended on the child’s age. In younger children, grandparents tended to ‘wait and see’ whether the child ‘grows out of’ any presenting problems. Some seek help early but it can take a long time to get a diagnosis: ‘Might have PTSD but not diagnosed. Under assessment. Struggling with schoolwork’. The most common diagnosis was attachment disorder (53 cases), violent/aggressive behaviour (48), ADHD/ADD (43) and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (39). Other common diagnoses included Autism, Foetal Alcohol, Oppositional Defiance Disorder and Conduct Disorder. Many (298) had no diagnosis. Some grandparents are sure that living in a congenial and loving environment will heal the problems caused by an adverse early life: ‘she is slowly overcoming them’.

Of the 397 grandparent families who care for children from drug-addicted parents, 57 (14%) indicated that one or more of their grandchildren had assaulted them physically, in most cases (49/57) more than once, and in some (20/57) more than five times. In a recent review article, Kimble (2016) examined 15 years of research on how children experienced family violence and abuse. One response shown in some of the literature is a higher likelihood of children becoming violent, although in this study that happens in only a small minority of cases. The responses of the caregivers to such violence varied, but mainly fell into five categories – time out and discipline, caring, calling the police, removing the child from the property and seeking other forms of help. For younger children, time out, talking and behavioural strategies were usually used: ‘put him in his room and shut the door’; ‘after I got over the shock, I explained to her that was not how we do it. She was physically abused by CYF carer’. Many grandparents tried working with a variety of different strategies, including a variety of disciplinary processes, external counselling and informing CYF. Some of the grandparents of younger children worry about what is going to happen:

Have had his medication increased and done the Incredible Years parenting program to learn new techniques. His brain wiring is responsible for these outbursts, he is damaged and gets out of control, he's only a little guy right now but I can see all sorts of trouble ahead as he develops if I don’t get some help and support.

Within the organisation Grandparents Raising Grandchildren, members have ongoing discussions about how to support children’s violent behaviour. One view is that the violence appears to emerge from a loss of control, and this was included in one of the survey questions. In 46 of the 57 violence cases, the grandparents note that the child becomes violent ‘due to a loss of conscious control’. This is experienced by caregivers as if the child cannot control their violent impulses for a period and will not respond to rational mitigation strategies. No research was found specifically on this area, and there is not enough information to consider whether it derives from learned behaviours within violent families, or prior neurological damage linked to substance use (Good et al. 2010).

Quite a few of the grandparents have called the police when the older children have assaulted them. In some cases, this has led to charges against the youth:

One child is currently going through youth court on assault charges. The older child now does not use violence and has not for some time.

Such action is not taken lightly and a number spoke about the heartbreak of having to call the police about their loved grandchildren or, in several instances, ask older children to move out.

Finally, the extent, causes and diagnosis of the problems many of these children face are not straightforward. There is, for example, often significant disagreement between experts over what the problems are:

We have had three court-ordered Psych reports and each time they arrived at different conclusions and all three have been wrong. Not just my opinion.

Moreover, even when the diagnosis is agreed, the solutions are not always clear. Some were concerned about the prescribing of Ritalin, an amphetamine, for childhood hyperactivity, fearing it will lead to addiction in the next generation. More importantly, a recent wide-ranging review of research concludes that the small evidence of benefit from these drugs derives from low-quality evidence, and that some side effects, including sleeplessness and loss of appetite (Storebo et al. 2015) are likely to occur. Many of the grandparents state it is difficult to find high-quality expert advice.

Nearly 400 of the children were attending school when the survey was conducted. Most (75%) of the grandparents agreed or strongly agreed that the children were getting the support they needed to achieve in school:

Good school, very supportive of her and of us as parents.

While satisfied, they often point to resource difficulties that the schools have in meeting the needs of the children, such as ‘as the children’s grandmother I attend school mornings till lunch as support for grandson’, and ‘We are putting a lot of resource into our grandchildren’s education.’ Several noted they were funding after-school tutoring such as Kip McGrath to try to improve school achievement.

Also, some of those who are satisfied have concerns about their grandchildren’s progress: ‘His speech is not good. I don’t know why the education department stopped therapy when his speech is worse now than it ever was.’ As well, there is sometimes a gap between good educational support and managing the emotional problems many of these children bring: ‘She is doing extremely well academically but emotionally struggles from time to time especially around changes.’ A number of grandparents comment that the schools seem to have little knowledge of the emotional needs of traumatised children.

Many of these children are doing fine at school and achieving well. Schooling is relatively unproblematic where the children are achieving at or above the normal range, and where there are few emotional or behavioural problems. But such problems can lead to a breakdown in school support:

Teachers need to be taught how to deal with kids that have been to hell and back – instead they just say well that happened then he needs to learn how to get over it. Gee that makes me so mad to hear – No wonder my Grandson challenges his teacher because he picks up her body language that she doesn’t like him because she thinks he is just naughty.

Some grandparents also feel their grandchildren are unfairly discriminated against. One notes: ‘I feel she is unfairly treated because of her name. Because she is Māori’; and another:

And I am disappointed in the system. They have him pigeon holed. He is Samoan and a clown. He is trying hard to work, they don’t believe him when he says he doesn’t understand something. They think he is playing around. He doesn’t understand much maths. His teacher won’t listen to his concerns.

However, some of the schools provide excellent support for these children. One grandparent outlined how the school was helping the child gradually overcome behavioural problems. Another outlines a ‘wraparound’ support system:

A lady at school has mentored her, some school activities fees have been paid for. The Travellers Club at school, for children from broken homes, has been good, building self-esteem, encouraging her to write her thoughts down on good days and bad. She can leave class and go to the counsellor if needed. The school understands our situation. She has had medical and health support through school too.

The biggest barrier to these children learning in schools is the emotional and behavioural problems many bring with them. Some schools deal with this effectively, but many grandparents find there is a lack of knowledge and understanding of the needs of this group which can jeopardise learning and lead to poor educational outcomes.

Many of the children in this study are doing well, in good health and meeting developmental milestones. Some are getting timely assistance in the school setting. But a minority are not, with some of these children having inadequate diagnoses and little, if any, help. The large number of children with emotional and behavioural problems is of concern, whether caused by pre-natal or subsequent problems. This study did not include any process of clinical assessment, and therefore relied on the descriptions provided by the grandparents. Although the problem cannot be quantified, nor compared to the overall population, it is evident that some of these children are in need of expert support.

Drug use in New Zealand and the implications for grandparent families

In a recent (2016) attempt to construct a New Zealand Drug Harm Index, McFadden’s ‘expert’ panel places methamphetamine at the top of a scale of both personal and social harm arising from use.

Various research projects that track the use of illegal drugs in New Zealand (Wilkins et al. 2016a, 2016b) have noted a number of recent trends. An increase in drug use has been fuelled by changing systems of supply and availability. In particular, Wilkins et al. (2016b, p. 23) note a reduction in the supply of cannabis and increasing use of methamphetamine caused by: increased availability, growing gang involvement in the sale of the drug, a rise in semi-public (‘street corner’) availability and a growing international supply chain. Many other substances are also available, such as the concern about potent types of synthetic cannabis, but the headline story in this country has been about meth.

Bradbury (2016) argues that the increase in meth availability is driven by simple economics underpinned by recent legislative changes:

If you could have your house seized and property taken for making money from cultivating drugs, you may as well make as much as you can and rather than spend it on assets, live on cash. Cannabis cultivation – while extremely profitable – takes at least 3 months to get a payout on. Meth is a far more lucrative product for cash payouts. Instead of waiting 3 months to make a profit from a cannabis crop, gangs can make the same amount from a cook up of meth in a weekend.

For the families involved in this research project, and for the growing number of grandparents raising grandchildren, drug addiction is already the main reason for children coming into grandparent care. The increased use of methamphetamine is likely to lead to more grandparent-led families, as drug addiction is the largest factor behind parents becoming unable or to look after their own children and sending them into grandparent care.

The growth in drug addiction has implications for social policy for the drug user, in terms of treatment services, health and mental health, housing, social policy and education. But, at a more hidden level, it also has policy implications for the families, especially when the children end up in kinship care.

Whether it happened over time or suddenly, most grandparent families need economic assistance when taking on the care of the grandchildren. This may be in the form of the UCB, housing assistance, a benefit or meeting health and education needs. The UCB policy, which makes people ‘prove’ that they will be looking after the children for more than 12 months, is a particular barrier to economic stability, because it is always possible that the parent may overcome their addiction and resume parenting. The UCB is a crucial payment for many families and needs to be made readily available as part of a significant package of measures to limit the harm caused by drug addiction in parents.

Attention needs to be paid to the children. This study has revealed patterns of significant health, educational and personal problems among many of the children. At one end of the spectrum, there are a small proportion of children with high and complex physical, social, emotional and mental illnesses. These children find it hard to learn at school, are not getting adequate support and may be violent to their caregivers and others. Policy-makers need to pay attention to providing the very best care and treatment environment for these young people, because grandparents fear they are at risk of poor futures.

For the children whose problems are not as severe, but are demonstrating clear barriers to effective learning, or who have untreated problems (and especially where the children are violent towards caregivers or others), again a treatment plan and good quality advice is essential. The children tend to have increasing problems as they get older, just at the time when grandparents may be experiencing their own health or other difficulties. The goal needs to be to ensure that the children do not reproduce their parental drug use, and this will require active intervention in many cases (Linden et al. 2013)

There are some major barriers to healing the families because the drug addict parents are all criminals under current law, and quite a few do spend time in prison. They are likely to die younger than expected due to accident, suicide or drug-related illness (especially with meth, which causes a range of health problems). Effective treatment programmes are needed, with a focus on healing the person and healing the whole family/whanau.

In conclusion, a large study of grandparents raising grandchildren (Gordon 2016) has provided the opportunity to examine the (mainly qualitative) data about families and children, where the child is no longer in parent care. The largest factor in that study is parental drug addiction and its impact on the families and children. The effects of parental drug addiction have been explored in more depth in this paper, raising questions about the burden of caring and the needs of the children. It is likely that a continued increase in the number of grandparent caregivers both here and overseas is at least partly driven by increases in addictions. The study raises questions about the capacity of ageing grandparents to cope well due to personal health and resource issues. On top of this, many of the children have untreated health problems, or are waiting a long time to get help. Some of the children are failing badly in the school system due to these problems.

There is no current research in New Zealand on the teratogenic effects of drug addiction on the neurological functioning of children, and teratogenic drugs are not mentioned in public health campaigns such as that currently undertaken by the Brainwave Trust (Hayward 2017). In a sense it does not matter whether it is the effects of drugs intra-uterine, or the effects of disrupted lifestyles, that causes the range of problems described by grandparent carers. The findings of this large study demonstrate that grandparent carers face many challenges in raising these children, and that support to help them overcome barriers is often lacking. State provision of adequate financial, health or educational support, offered in a timely manner, can improve the children’s outcomes and reduce the stress on the carers.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 Autistic spectrum, Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, Oppositional defiance disorder, Global developmental delay and Foetal alcohol syndrome disorder.