This study evaluated sociodemographic characteristics of students enrolled in dentistry, oral health and dental technology in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) between 2016 and 2020. Sociodemographic data were obtained from central student record systems and NZ population data from the 2018 Census. Age, gender and citizenship status were analysed for the whole cohort, whilst other categories were analysed for NZ citizens and permanent residents only. Descriptive statistics were presented as raw counts or rates per 100,000 of the population. Most NZ students were educated in the public system. For dentistry and dental technology, a third of the cohort were international students, contrasting with only 4% of oral health students. Most NZ-educated students attended schools serving socioeconomically privileged communities. For all programmes, most students came from urban areas and there were more female than male students enrolled. Māori and Pacific students represented 9.3% and 5.4% of enrolments, despite representing 20% and 9% of the NZ population. Māori and Pacific peoples and those from rural and low socioeconomic areas were underrepresented, despite efforts to address such inequities. Admission policies in NZ universities need to ensure that Māori and Pacific peoples and those from rural and low socioeconomic areas are considered from a social justice and equity positioning.

Tokenism has become an increasingly visible feature of contemporary research and scholarship, particularly in contexts where expectations of diversity and inclusion are institutionally embedded. While often presented as evidence of progress, tokenism raises critical questions about power, participation and the conditions under which knowledge is produced. Tokenism is more than simply a failure of inclusion, it is a functional feature of contemporary research systems, enabling the appearance of equity while preserving existing distributions of power. This paper examines tokenism as a form of inclusion that is more symbolic than substantive, projecting an image of progress while leaving existing hierarchies intact. We argue that tokenism in nursing research is not simply a problem of representation, but a form of epistemic injustice that shapes who participates, whose contributions are recognised and what knowledge is legitimised. In doing so, tokenism can obscure expertise, distort perceptions of competence and position individuals as representatives of identity rather than as authoritative contributors. These dynamics have ethical and epistemic consequences, including the reproduction of marginalisation, the generation of partial knowledge and the erosion of trust. Addressing tokenism requires a reorientation towards collaborative and justice-oriented practices in which participation and epistemic authority is shared.

Kindness is frequently framed as an unassailable virtue, celebrated across social, professional and political domains as a simple and uncomplicated good. It is rarely problematised, and its assumed benefits are seldom interrogated, leaving kindness largely positioned as a self-evident moral imperative. In this paper, we adopt a Foucauldian lens, not to seek an essential definition of kindness, but to consider how it circulates and operates discursively, what effects it produces and what is surrendered in its performance. We position kindness as a discourse that does not merely encourage compassion or generosity but also regulate behaviour, shapes subjectivities and establishes boundaries around what may or may not be said. Through such mechanisms, the imperative to 'be kind' can act to silence resistance, temper critique and foster compliance, functioning as a subtle technology of governance. By problematising kindness in this way, we reveal how a practice so often presented as wholly benevolent can also operate as a powerful disciplinary force. We suggest that alternatives to the disciplinary framing of kindness may be found within First Nations knowledge systems, which offer different ways of understanding generosity and care beyond Western institutional logics. Our purpose is not to argue for the abandonment of kindness, but to highlight that it should not be accepted uncritically; its operations and consequences must be understood in order for it to be engaged ethically and politically.

Crucial to promoting Indigenous youth autonomy is engaging with young people in research processes in a way that promotes their voice and cultural agency. Like other young people, taitamariki Māori perceptions of their own lives and experiences provide essential input towards creating better conditions for and with them, now and in the future. In planning Harmonised, our school-based taitamariki and Māori-centred project promoting healthy intimate partner relationships that ran from 2016 to 2020, we found little literature to guide our engagement processes.

This reflection examines the past 50 years of Indigenous nursing, highlighting both progress and persistent inequities. Fifty years ago, Indigenous nurses were largely invisible within the profession, their voices marginalised and their cultural backgrounds undervalued. Although numbers have grown, Indigenous nurses, particularly Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand, remain significantly underrepresented in the workforce relative to population need. Enduring structural and systemic barriers continue to impede recruitment, retention and the integration of Indigenous worldviews into nursing curricula and practice. This commentary refers to historical and contemporary contexts that shaped this landscape, including colonisation, racism and the suppression of Indigenous knowledge. It acknowledges significant milestones such as Dr. Irihapeti Ramsden's leadership in establishing Kawa Whakaruruhau and Cultural Safety, while also noting the political backlash that diluted its original focus on Māori health inequities. Indigenous nurses, past and present, bring culturally grounded, relational and holistic approaches to care, bridging the clinical and cultural worlds and building trust with Indigenous communities. Their growing scholarly contributions and international collaborations-such as the Indigenous Global Research Alliance in Nursing-are advancing Indigenous methodologies and evidence. While gains have been made, the future requires culturally responsive pipelines and collective commitment to addressing inequity, racism and structural injustice in nursing.

Aotearoa New Zealand (Aotearoa), like many countries, experienced widespread demand for health services, threatening to collapse the health system. In addition to stringent border control, isolation policies for those with COVID-19, and instituting lockdowns, the government imposed a COVID-19 vaccine mandate for groups of essential workers, including healthcare professionals. Some literature argues that the COVID-19 vaccine mandates restrict individuals’ freedoms through the loss of employment, income, and status as a healthcare professional. This qualitative research explored how COVID-19 vaccine mandates impacted healthcare professionals. Data from eight in-depth interviews with former healthcare professionals who experienced termination of their employment, and four managers or business owners were thematically analysed. The theme, Mandate-Induced Traumatic Decision-Making and Loss and two sub-themes, A Change in Attitudes and Ongoing Impacts on Lives, were identified. We found the COVID-19 vaccine mandates had detrimental impacts on those healthcare professionals affected by their decision not to have or complete COVID-19 vaccinations. Despite what participants believed were legitimate reasons for not being vaccinated, they experienced ongoing trauma and psychological, unemployment, and financial harm. The findings question the public good benefits of the vaccine mandate when it restricts the freedom, autonomy, and agency of much-needed healthcare professionals, which provide useful insights.

AIMS:To explore the alignment of nursing and healthcare practice illustrated in the Fundamentals of Care framework with Māori (Indigenous person of Aotearoa, New Zealand) worldviews using Indigenous methods. DESIGN:Discursive report. METHODS:In October 2023, around 50 healthcare professionals and Māori leaders from across Aotearoa, New Zealand, attended a wānanga, an Indigenous Māori approach for sharing knowledge and engaging in in-depth discussion and deliberation. RESULTS:Attendees understood the origins of the Fundamentals of Care framework and how it translates to practice. The depth and breadth of meaning when referring to Māori values and practices adds a layer of complexity when attempting to align Māori worldviews with the Fundamentals of Care framework. A key outcome of the day was a call for tāngata Tiriti (people of the Treaty-non-Māori) to continue to work in partnership with tāngata whenua (people of the land-Māori) to explore how the Fundamentals of Care framework could be used with a mode of practice that emphasises Māori values and practices such as whakawhanaungatanga (establishing relationships) and manaakitanga (showing respect, generosity and care for others). CONCLUSION:Applying Indigenous methods to explore problems and co-create solutions offers the potential to advance health equity agendas. Wānanga, as a forum for engaging in the process of sharing, reflecting, discussing and learning, provides a mana-enhancing (strengths-based) space for tāngata whenua (people of the land-Māori) and tāngata Tiriti (people of the Treaty-non-Māori), to relate and collaborate. Additional wānanga are required to co-create a mode of practice that can be applied by all health professionals and that meets the needs of Māori. IMPACT:This report addresses how the Fundamentals of Care framework can be scrutinised for its usefulness or adaptability to encompass Indigenous populations' culture and care needs. Critical points of difference between the Fundamentals of Care framework and Indigenous Māori worldviews exist and need further exploration. This report impacts the delivery of healthcare for Indigenous Māori and the provision of healthcare by all nurses. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION:No patient or public contribution.

How intimate partner violence (IPV) is conceptualized affects what we see when we look at situations involving IPV and what we think the solutions to the problem of IPV are-either in individual cases or in the development of broader legal and policy responses. In this article, it is suggested that while conceptualizing IPV as coercive control is an improvement over previous understandings, it does not go far enough. Coercive control must be located within a broader conceptualization of IPV as a form of social and systemic entrapment if it is not to operate in a harmful manner for victim-survivors.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, there has been a marked decrease in the uptake of routine childhood vaccinations since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among Maori and Pacific children. This Maori and Pacific-centered research used an interpretive description methodology. We undertook culturally informed interviews and discussions with Maori and Pacific caregivers (n = 24) and healthcare professionals (n = 13) to understand their perceptions of routine childhood vaccines. Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis and privileged respective Maori and Pacific worldviews. Four themes were constructed. "We go with the norm" reflected how social norms, health personnel and institutions promoted (and sometimes coerced) participants' acceptance of routine vaccines before the pandemic. "Everything became difficult" explains how the pandemic added challenges to the daily struggles of whanau (extended family networks) and healthcare professionals. Participants noted how information sources influenced disease and vaccine perceptions and health behaviors. "It needed to have an ethnic-specific approach" highlighted the inappropriateness of Western-centric strategies that dominated during the initial pandemic response that did not meet the needs of Maori and Pacific communities. Participants advocated for whanau-centric vaccination efforts. "People are now finding their voice" expressed renewed agency among whanau about vaccination following the immense pressure to receive COVID-19 vaccines. The pandemic created an opportune time to support informed parental vaccine decision-making in a manner that enhances the mana (authority, control) of whanau. Maori and Pacific-led vaccination strategies should be embedded in immunization service delivery to improve uptake and immunization experiences for whanau.

Australian lawyers, scholars and policy makers have grappled for decades with the barriersfaced by victim-survivors in successfully raising self-defence in response to criminal charges for the use of force against their abusive partners. In this article we discuss a recent legal innovation developed to address similar barriers in the New Zealand context. The defence in R v Ruddelle was ground-breaking in Australasia in that expert evidence on 'intimate partner violence entrapment'was admitted at trial from an expert who was not a psychologist or psychiatrist. The aim was to assist the jury in more accurately understanding the facts for the purposes of determining whether the Indigenous defendants' defensive force was 'reasonable'in self-defence. Similar evidence was provided at sentencing. In this article we assess the gains that were made in taking such an approach at sentencing, as well as the limitations of this strategy at trial in this particular case.

In assessing whether victim-survivors of intimate partner violence (IPV) were acting in self-defence in response to homicide charges, the criminal court favours disciplinary knowledges which erase social context and structural violence. This article argues that these factors are integral to understanding victim-survivors' experiences of IPV. The courts' overreliance on Euro-Western psych disciplines (psychiatry and psychology) that privilege neoliberal ideas of self and perpetuate flawed psychological theories of IPV is a significant problem. Critically, the white epistemology underpinning the psych disciplines and mainstream theories of IPV omit any appreciation of the operation of colonial violence, institutional racism, and the marginalisation of Indigenous women. This article suggests that experts must be able to critique the family violence response system using intersectional and anti-colonial conceptual frameworks. This will assist the criminal courts in understanding Indigenous and marginalised women's realities and support socially just outcomes in cases involving prosecuted victim-survivors. The article concludes by sharing the authors’ insights from providing expert evidence on social and systemic entrapment at trial and sentencing in the 2020 New Zealand case of R v Ruddelle.