96 ● Patrick Vakaoti
In recognition of the disadvantaged position of Pacific people in New
Zealand, the government, through the Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs and
other stakeholders, has initiated pan-Pacific approaches to addressing educa-
tion, health, and housing concerns. These approaches do not usually account
specifically for the issues of young people. Where they do, young people are
accommodated in relatively traditional “church and pastoral activities, health
promotion, sports and entertainment” (Vakaoti 2013, 210). There is little
evidence of efforts to ensure that Pacific young people are directly engaged in
meaningful initiatives that aim to challenge and address their marginalization
and contribute to social transformation. It is in this more radical context that
group work should be considered; it can provide a setting in which the chal-
lenging of oppression can be combined with an adherence to the values of
reciprocity, respect, and relationships that are part of the Pacific culture and
of the lives of its people.
Considerations for Group Work with Pacific Young People
Adopting an open mind is necessary for students of sociology who may find
themselves participating in or facilitating group work. One must not adopt
a place of innocence or an attitude of naivety or allow oneself to be prescrip-
tively guided by a step-by-step manual of facilitating group work. Instead,
the group facilitator must critically engage with some of the myths of group
work and be especially aware of the myths relating to the specific group.
This is pertinent when the facilitator is engaging in group work with young
people from Pacific backgrounds, whose communally and culturally oriented
heritage has the potential to either contribute to or hinder purposeful group
work. Four myths regarding groups of Pacific young people are discussed here.
The first myth is that Pacific young people naturally thrive in group settings
because of their strong communal and religious affiliations. This myth would
assume that a generic approach could therefore be adopted when the facilita-
tor is working with these young people. Whereas this may hold true for some
purposes, it fails to acknowledge the diversity of young people and instead
erroneously portrays them as a homogenous group. In the case of Cheva-
lier Hostel described earlier, the residents’ underprivileged status masked the
opportunities for group work that could have been initiated with them. In
fact, there were possibilities for primary school and secondary school groups,
a group for working residents, and a night shelter group. In New Zealand,
Pacific young people generally exist in and traverse many group settings,
such as choir, sports, and cultural performance groups. Although experiences
from these settings may not directly transfer into group work behaviors, they
can be harnessed to support group work processes and stages. For example,