Bicultural Practice: Beyond Mere tokenism ● 109government department providing child welfare services) was highlighted in
a report entitled Pūao-te-Ata-tū (daybreak) (Ministerial Advisory Committee
1986), which challenged both the structure of the department and the services
it provided, including the skills and attitudes of its workers and the lack of
cultural integration of Māori values and processes. Pūao-te-Ata-tū has had a
significant influence on human service work since 1986, but for Māori, the
full intent of the report has rarely been achieved (Hollis 2006).
Working BiculturallyA distinction should be made between biculturalism and working bicul-
turally. Biculturalism is first and foremost a policy of incorporating Māori
language, processes, and cultural values into institutions and policies of
government and other organizations. Its goal is to bring about social justice
for Māori and to acknowledge their status as tangata whenua, the indigenous
people of Aotearoa/New Zealand, through the Treaty of Waitangi. Working
biculturally, on the other hand, takes place in the New Zealand context when
someone who is not ethnically or culturally Māori works with a Māori indi-
vidual, whānau (extended family), or community.
The starting point for a social or community worker is always with
an understanding of themselves and their own position, what O’Connor,
Wilson, and Setterlund (2003, 53) called “the skillful, disciplined use of
the self.” Social workers need to know who they are, recognizing what
they bring in terms of culture, class, gender, education, and more impor-
tant, the layers of power and privilege. It can be difficult to accept these
types of deconstructions, particularly if a person feels they are themselves
from a disadvantaged group. In addition, people can believe that, because
they understand their own layers of powerlessness or marginalization, they
therefore have a full understanding of the Māori experience. However,
only Māori can fully understand the experience of being significantly
disadvantaged in most social indicators (Marriott and Sim 2014) and
underrepresented in positions of power and influence, all the while living
in the only land they can call home.
Tolich (2002) noted that university students struggle with biculturalism
and in knowing how to include Māori in their research. He concluded that
Pākehā students often avoid studying Māori issues because they are paralyzed
by the fear of making mistakes. This paralysis and anxiety can be heightened
in social work, when Pākehā are obliged to work with Māori clients, espe-
cially in statutory organizations such as the child care and protection teams in
the child welfare services. While researchers can decline or excuse themselves
from undertaking research that addresses issues specifically relevant to Māori,