To Vote or Not to Vote: Indigenous Peoples Face a Choice

In 2015, something rare happened in Canada: hope, passion, mobilization. Carried by the Idle No More movement, a generation of Indigenous people believed that politics could truly change our lives. We elected the highest number of Indigenous Members of Parliament in the country’s history. Voter turnout in ridings with high Indigenous populations saw a remarkable increase. For a brief moment, it seemed that Justin Trudeau’s promise — “no relationship is more important than the one with Indigenous peoples” — was finally coming true.

And yet, nine and a half years later, the results are mixed. Yes, there were victories: the Indigenous Languages Act, Bill C-92 on child and family services, the incorporation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples into Canadian law. But there were also failures, broken promises, bureaucratic silence, and deep institutional inertia.

The clearest symbol of this failure remains the Indian Act, still in force — a piece of colonial legislation from 1876. How, in 2025, can we still uphold a law that classifies Indigenous peoples as wards of the state? A law that governs our lands, our wills, our civil rights, as if we were incapable of self-determination? Even after a decade of fine words and symbolic reconciliation, this supposedly “priority” relationship was never truly based on real respect. Marc Miller is gone. Justin Trudeau is gone. And the Indian Act is still here. We’ve merely tinkered around the edges of the Canadian system, without ever transforming its heart.

Now, we approach a new election: Pierre Poilievre versus Mark Carney. On one side, a combative, populist Conservative — but at least consistent in his positions. On the other, a well-spoken, polished technocrat — but with no clear vision for First Nations. I’m sure he offers a firm handshake — but has he ever left Bay Street to sit and listen to an Elder by the fire?

I remember meeting Stephen Poloz, former Governor of the Bank of Canada, before the Standing Committee on Finance. The Bank of Canada controls how our economy works — including the economies of Indigenous peoples and communities. They’re the ones holding the reins. I asked him a simple question: “What’s your connection to Indigenous peoples?” He answered, with a faint smile and equal simplicity: “Once, I drove through a reserve while on vacation.” I wonder if Mark Carney is just driving through, too.

I’m not saying Pierre Poilievre would be better. I’m only saying that Indigenous people no longer have trust. Not in the electoral process, not in the promises. In 2015, we had hope. In 2025, we have memory. The memory of Tina Fontaine, of Joyce Echaquan, of Ashlee Shingoose, of Chanie Wenjack. And the memory of a government that, despite ceremonies, conferences, and accolades, chose to preserve the colonial foundations of Canada.

Today, our youth are more cynical than ever. They see elections as a game meant for others. And who can blame them? When we’re still waiting for clean water, decent housing, or justice for our missing and murdered sisters — it’s hard to believe in campaign promises.

But is abstention the answer? Perhaps a Conservative government, driven by necessity, will do what the Liberals never dared: abolish the Indian Act and build a new relationship based on treaties, equality, and mutual respect. Sometimes, a presumed enemy can become an unexpected ally.

It’s time to speak the truth: this country is still afraid to recognize us as nations. It fears our strength, our languages, our economies, our systems of governance. Perhaps it is not Ottawa’s role to define who we are — but ours, through the ballot box or through the rebuilding of our own systems.

The Indian Act, driving through the reserve,
“Yes, Governor, shine your shoes, Governor.”
Always polite, always prompt: “Right away, Governor.”
But do we, at last, have a vision that dreams?

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/espaces-autochtones/2151128/vote-autochtones-abstention-promesses 

The Uncomfortable Irony: Prioritizing Military Ships Over Indigenous Children’s Future: Federal Election 2025

On a sunny Sunday, while Canadians enjoy their coffee or still sleep in, the Prime Minister walks over to the Governor General's residence to call for a federal election. This moment symbolizes what is important, but also highlights what is often ignored.

One of the final acts of Justin Trudeau’s government and the beginning of Mark Carney’s was the approval of $22 billion in spending for the Irving Shipyards to build naval destroyers. As Canada moves forward with this costly military procurement, we must ask: how can we justify such massive spending when the most vulnerable among us—Indigenous children—remain trapped in a broken system?

This decision highlights a glaring and uncomfortable irony: our government is willing to invest heavily in defense projects, yet continues to neglect the basic human rights of Indigenous children. The $22 billion naval program is the largest defense procurement in Canadian history, but while military preparedness is deemed essential, there is an equally pressing need to invest in the future of our children—particularly Indigenous children who have long suffered from systemic neglect.

Indigenous teachings emphasize thinking in terms of seven generations, urging us to make decisions that benefit not just our present, but future generations. If we are truly concerned about security, we must first ensure that our youth have the foundation they need to thrive, not just survive. It’s a glaring contradiction that, while billions are being allocated to military ships, our children’s basic rights are still in question, and the government is dragging its feet on resolving the issues that directly affect their future.

The ongoing legal battle concerning the welfare of First Nations children is a key example of the government’s failure to act. This battle, which began under the Conservative Harper government and continued throughout Trudeau’s tenure, has seen multiple rulings from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. The Tribunal has repeatedly found that the federal government discriminates against Indigenous children by underfunding essential child welfare services and failing to implement Jordan’s Principle—a policy meant to ensure that Indigenous children receive public services without discrimination. Despite these rulings, the government continues to delay compensation and reforms that could provide these children with the justice they deserve.

This refusal to act is not only an affront to these children’s dignity but also a clear violation of their human rights. Cindy Blackstock, a staunch advocate for Indigenous children’s rights, has fought for years to bring attention to these injustices. Yet, despite her tireless efforts, the government continues to ignore the Tribunal’s rulings, failing to negotiate a fair settlement or take the necessary steps to make meaningful changes. Instead, we see the government actively diverting billions to military contracts, while the lives of children remain at risk in a system designed to fail them.

Why such urgency when it comes to military procurement, yet such profound delay in ensuring that Indigenous children receive the support they need? The government seems more focused on purchasing destroyers than on securing the future of its youth. The cost of the military ships will not ensure the safety or future of Canada’s most vulnerable populations, but the cost of justice for First Nations children would offer hope—a real chance at breaking the cycle of poverty, trauma, and inequality that has plagued them for generations.

The government’s failure to negotiate on the child welfare case speaks volumes. The refusal to settle and provide the necessary compensation for the harm done to these children is not just a bureaucratic delay—it is an ongoing violation of their rights. Every day this case continues is another day of suffering for Indigenous children deprived of their basic needs, while the government expends resources on defense projects that fail to address the real threats to our society. If only Indigenous children were as good friends to the Irvings as they are to the Liberal Party of Canada.

If only our children were missiles or bullets, maybe then the government would prioritize their future. Maybe then the resources would be diverted toward ensuring that these children have what they need to thrive, not just survive. The fact that we continue to struggle with issues like child welfare for Indigenous youth while simultaneously making military investments of such magnitude is a stark reminder of our national priorities—priorities that seem to lack a clear vision for the future of our children.

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/espaces-autochtones/2150087/depenses-militaires-enfance-autochtone 

The Changing Aboriginal Woman’s Role in the Family and the Workforce

This is an independent radio documentary on the changing roles of aboriginal women since colonialization. This documentary was produced for the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba Aboriginal Education course EDUA 1500.Group members include Lana Jorgensen, Kyleigh Hurak and Rachael Smith.

To provide some personal insight we speak to Wanda Wuttunee (Professor in Native Studies at the University of Manitoba). Through the interview we examine aboriginal women's role within the family prior to colonialization and how the woman’s role in the family was well defined, but not restrictive. We examine how the arrival of the settlers brought many changes to the Aboriginal peoples. Primarily through residential schools, the settlers forced their beliefs and values upon the Aboriginal peoples that changed the role of women within the family.

Next Wanda Wuttunee explains how through the workforce aboriginal women have become the strong backbone of modern Aboriginal society. Like modern women they are overcoming adversity to participate in all spheres of the workforce. They use their traditions and traditional values to achieve success in their chosen careers and benefit their communities.

Interviews with: Dr. Wanda Wuttunee

Production Team: Rachael Smith, Lana Jorgensen, Kyleigh Hurak

Music: Woman of Red by Tracy Bone, Little Angel by Asani, Buffalo Song by Asani, Niwiciwakan by Asani, Eagle Man/Changing Woman by Buffy Sainte-Marie.

To Learn More (podcast & radio documentary)

https://archive.org/details/Group8Mixdown

https://archive.org/download/Group8Mixdown/group%208%20Mixdown.mp3

Investigating the Child and Family Services of Manitoba: A History of State Parenting

Manitoba Liberal Leader Jon Gerrard came to the University of Manitoba on Oct 17, 2013 to speak about his new report on the child welfare system in Manitoba. While speaking to the teacher candidates in the Aboriginal education class he talked about his long journey in gaining greater knowledge of many of the faults of system in Manitoba. It seems that while there are many caring individuals within the system the state as the final decision maker within our institution makes for a very poor parent. It seems that state can never be a loving or caring parent to the actual parents. The current CFS system is quick on the gun not taking due process to assess families and simply just removes the child. It is a poor parent indeed. 

Replacing  apprehension with support; Replacing adversarial interventions with partnership and collaboration; Replacing fear with hope. A proposal for change to Manitoba’s child welfare system. 

Jon Gerrard and Robert-Falcon Ouellette

 

While listening to Jon Gerrard presentation I was struck by the number of children currently in care. There are very few in Manitoba who will not say the child and family services model is broken. When a child is taking into custody they could be moved 15 times in a 7 year period. While this is certainly due to a number of reasons some being the child was returned to the parents a number of times and the placements in foster families was of a short duration. Other nations have similar problems, but they are experimenting. England is doing something completely different in the providing of services to families and ensuring the protection of children.

Some English Child and Family workers instead of having large case loads will only be assigned a few families. The working day will often begin at 7 AM when they arrive at a family’s home and consist of getting the children out of bed and packing them off to school. The workers must be tough because some parents will tell them to f*&^* off. They will also video tape the going on in the home and replay what transpired to the parents in order to find better actions to different circumstances such as when kids are screaming and parents are having trouble coping. We need a Grandmother program here in Manitoba someone to demonstrate good parenting and help keep people on track at home and in looking for working and education. Manitoba currently has over 9 700 children in custody. They have become an industry in and of themselves. These children have been removed either voluntary or forcibly from the custody of parents who are unable to ensure the basic needs of their children. The great majority of children move from short term to short term placements. The system has become a self-perpetuating machine that is unable to innovate or change.

While in many cases the removal of children from biological parents care may be the best course of action for the long term interests of the child. This is especially true if they can be placed in caring foster families on a long term basis. The province though is a poor substitute for the love of a parent. Due to the nature of bureaucracy little long-term human love is given these children and the provinces becomes like a cold parent or worse a dead-beat parent.  People need to learn how to be a parent from a Grandmother. Manitoba should institute a similar program as found in England and as talked about in your presentation the Nisichawayasihk Cree Nation. Families should not be forced into the program, but many who are eligible will surely gladly sign-up for the extra help in the fight to keep their children. Families should sign a contract about certain behaviors. The English experience finds that only 15% of families will break the contract forcing the government to proceed with the removal of the children. This is a stark improvement over current rates. Too often families will meet with bureaucrats a few times in a year as we are learning in the Sinclair enquiry. We need programs that develop a sense of relationship with not multiple agencies, but one individual who allows them to better understand what actions they need to take in order to keep their children.

As we continue to maintain a system which creates a class of people that are locked into perpetual poverty and dependence upon the state, many are asking for a different way of managing child and family services. The role of the province in the daily lives of people should only be in extreme circumstances, but their role should be insuring that people have the tools and are able to get back on track. As the families are better able to perform in their personal and social responsibilities they gradually should see less of the provincial grandmother, but some parents need the chance to learn those parenting skills and the role of the state is to provide the tools so the individual can create the life that all human being deserve.    

The principal problem is that often statistics are difficult to find and to compare between jurisdictions. It is quite easy to find the information for countries such as England. When a child has been in care of the state they are 50 times more likely to not finish school. Children are also likely to repeat the same patterns of behavior with their own off spring. They are 66 times more likely to see their children taken into custody. The cost for each child in custody is 67 777$. I suspect the statistics are the same here in Manitoba, but that is difficult to ascertain. There is an enormous amount of money being spent by CFS. Sometimes you ask would be better off cutting a check to each parent in order to vanquish the poverty of the family. 

To Learn more (video)

http://youtu.be/BTdcG6V4ON4

Traditional Aboriginal Customary Adoption: A Collective and Individual Human Right

Perhaps one of the most ignored Indigenous and Human Rights issue facing Aboriginal communities and individuals is the lack of recognition for something we as Indigenous peoples have always practised and that has served our communities well in protecting our children; Traditional Customary Adoption. There are researchers like the Canada Research Chair Dr Ghislain Otis who is attempting to address this issue. Dr Otis (University of Ottawa) has written a new book L’adopition coutumiere autochtone et les defis du pluralism juridique about Aboriginal Customary Adoption within a pluralistic legal framework within Canada and more specifically Quebec. In the interview that I conducted with Dr Ghislain Otis (see below) there are two basic reasons why Dr Otis decided to edit and author this book:

1)                 There is a fundamental trend in international legal research concerning the need for better recognition of Indigenous legal traditions around the world and in Canada. There has been an increase in demands of Indigenous peoples for this recognition as we can see with the international protest movements like Idle No More. There also seems to be a general agreement by many that we must challenge these old colonial systems currently used by many nation-states.

2)                 Indigenous peoples had their own legal system that were sophisticated and well adapted to their own needs and circumstances. These systems have survived despite the attempts to eradicate them or the continued indifference by nation states. This indifference has manifested itself by the non-recognition by nation states that these Indigenous legal systems do exist. Nation states like Canada have responsibilities for Indigenous peoples and to protect their Human Rights. These responsibilities must be acknowledged and supported by state apparatus; and if you acknowledge these systems you must be have a better understanding and research this area of prime importance. Dr Otis asks “How can you have these systems work together?”

Customary adoption is an ancient form of adoption that has evolved and changed over time. It is a practice by which biological parents give their children to another set of adoptive parents. There is a wide variety between Indigenous legal systems in the matter of customary adoption. Some will create a complete break between the parents and child; other systems will maintain some form of relationship between parents and child. There are many variations between. According to the research of Dr Otis these are legal systems that create rights and obligations for Indigenous peoples and all Canadians.

Currently only the Northern territories have statues which recognize Indigenous customary adoption and only one province. British Columbia’s law though is ambivalent, because it leaves it to judges to decide if customary adoption meets the definition of what Aboriginal customary adoption is. This is a problem because this interferes with Indigenous law and legal systems making customary adoption the same as western adoption. This leads to the assimilation of the traditional forms of adoption and the Indigenous legal system into the Canadian state adoptive apparatus.

The Province of Quebec is presently debating customary adoption in the Quebec National Assembly. They have had a heated debate about customary adoption for the past 5 years. Currently there is a wide consensus towards the recognition of customary adoption. A working group was created with representatives from political parties, the government and First Nations. On April 16, 2012 they produced a report entitled Report of the Working Group on Customary Adoption in Aboriginal communities. A Bill has also been tabled that would recognize customary adoption in the civil code. This is a major change in constitutional law because it would not only recognize the two current forms of legal systems like common law and civil law, but it lays the beginning in Canada of recognition for Indigenous law as a separate but integrated legal system.

There is a great need for customary adoption within Aboriginal communities because children have multiple issues related to lack of parental right for the adoptive parents. There are issues related to this both individually and collectively. Individually because a child’s fundamental rights are not being protected; what is in the best interest of the child to stable and loving relationships. Should the child exist moved about between foster families and used as a pawn between two different legal systems? These customary adoptions are simply not easily recognized by the western legal system even thought they are still practised very frequently by many Indigenous peoples in Canada. The Inuit in northern Quebec are a prime example of Indigenous peoples who still practice customary adoption. Other issues which affect the individual are the possibilities where the biological parents may return and demand before a court and judge the return of a child or children. Because this Indigenous legal system is not recognized, the judge could return the child. When adoptive parents try using the Canadian state to obtain services to which they are entitled for their child, they often experience grave administrative difficulties. Other practical issues include trying to sign the child up for school; questions about legal authority; questions about child allowances which cannot be paid to the adoptive parents; situations of if the child dies or the adoptive parents dies who receives death benefits and inheritance. Since the parental connection is not legally established the rights of the child and parent are ignored and go unprotected. Collectively the non-recognition forces this form of traditional practice onto the margins and oppresses its continuation because it becomes too difficult to practice. Essentially the practice becomes extinct and dies out.

There are a number of positive points to the proposed law in Quebec because it allows Aboriginal communities to create their own formal system about how to regulate customary adoption. The decisions are left with the Indigenous community and their authority. The law will not define the affects of an adoption, but will require the Authority to define the affects like alimonies or support. It makes it easier to obtain approval and reduces many of the legal costs associated with lawyers and courts that are often incurred when navigating between both systems.

The less attractive element is that provincial child welfare agencies are mandated to be involved. The child welfare agency must approve these adoptions when a child has been involved with the Child and Family Services system. This allows a government agency to interfere with the Indigenous legal systems. They might interfere even though they have little understanding of this system. Dr Otis has a concern that even though it might be in the best interest and welfare of the child some children may be prevented from being adopted.  

Dr Otis also discussed the constitutional effect customary adoption may have. Because Indigenous legal questions are a federal responsibility then technically provinces would have little ability to extensively regulate customary adoption apart from minor recognition and procedures. It could force province to recognize aboriginal rights and would constrain provinces on how far they may regulate traditional Aboriginal practices.

To Learn More (Podcast & Interview)

http://archive.org/details/TraditionalAboriginalCustomaryAdoption

http://archive.org/download/TraditionalAboriginalCustomaryAdoption/OtisCustomaryAdoptionEnglishMixdown.mp3

Citations

Hunger Strike Protester: Kim Edwards Fighting for the Rights of Children in Child Welfare

This is an interview with Kim Edwards who is fighting for the Human Rights of children involved with child welfare system in Manitoba. Kim is the Godmother of Phoenix Sinclair, the little girl killed by her mother Samantha Kematch, and her mother's boyfriend, Karl McKay under terrible conditions of physical and mental abuse.

Kim has not been eating anything for the past 56 days only taking water, and some coffee and soda. She has asked that a Royal Commission be called to investigate the services that are offered or not offered to families involved with the CFS system. There is currently a provincial inquiry into Phoenix's case, which started last fall in 2012. Testimony has been given by many witnesses showing the failings of the system. It has been heard that social workers frequently lost track of the girl and failed to keep tabs on her and her family and nothing to stop the abuse. http://www.phoenixsinclairinquiry.ca/

Kim feels the commission is biased and will not produce real transformation that will protect all children in Manitoba. She has a sense that the commission will sweep under the rug any real chance for change. This is why Kim started her hunger strike so the terrible manner the system functions can be better understood and hopefully altered.  Kim has been sleeping in the open at the Manitoba legislature asking that the name of Phoenix be removed from the commission of inquiry so a wider investigation may take place.

The use of the hunger strike is an interesting method to gain attention and moral persuasion to fight without physical violence for a cause you believe in. Kim has a strong belief that there is an inherent structural violence in the Child and Family services system that even normal and well intentioned peoples cannot overcome. The nation-state makes a very poor parent; there is little love, nor emotional security that the state can provide to a child which is needed in their growth as human beings. I have had the opportunity to attend a couple of days at the hearings and my sense was there was a general lack of responsibility and accountability. There were no witnesses willing to say it was my fault, my role had these consequences; that I will stand and be counted. It is a shame that we have been unable to use the inquiry to find real solutions to the CFS not only for Phoenix but all children. There seems to be an entire industry built around CFS and the watching of abuse. It is perhaps the age we live in but the lack of accountability is telling. I had the opportunity to talk to a number of social workers and semi-independent agencies who are attempting to meet the needs of their people outside of the legislation. Many feel the current legislation is not intended to protect children and families, but the government from liable and fault.

While many see the CFS as an Aboriginal issue, it has very wide repercussions; from lower GDP, broken families, high costs, higher taxes, slower learning in schools, great social ills; it seems that we have come to a point of immobility; the inability to move forward or even to the side.  In the idea of the Wars of Influence, there exists a long term war occurring between the state and Aboriginal peoples. How many causalities are we willing to see before we commence real discussion about a system that responds to the needs of communities and families holistically. In any war of attrition, real solutions or the end only come about when one or both side decides enough is enough and too much blood has been spilled. While some may say it unfair to see CFS, the state and Aboriginal peoples in a war of influence on this issue, there are certainly larger issues at stake. Kim is a simple pawn within that larger fight, Phoenix is a pawn. It is about control and sovereignty. Is the state ready to hand over complete autonomy to Aboriginal CFS agencies and let them devise their own rules? If you viewed CFS and the state as an occupying power related to other wars such as the 2^nd Iraq War between the US, Sunni and Shiite Muslims is the concept of a War of Influence existing with a low level of violence possible? Many First Nations people view the CFS as so heavy handed that good will between communities has been destroyed. I know of no family in Manitoba that if they were told CFS was coming to their home that panic would not set in. There is generalized fear of CFS no matter what your socio-economic status. It is perhaps time for CFS to take lessons from policing and create community based programs that build relationships.

To Learn more (podcast & interview)
https://archive.org/details/KimEdwardsMixdown

https://ia600909.us.archive.org/17/items/KimEdwardsMixdown/kim%20edwards%20mixdown.mp3

Citations

Jail Baby: Stories about Children Born in Prison

This is a conversation with Hope McIntyre concerning her latest play Jail Baby co-written with Cairn Moore. It presents the life of character Jasmine, a composite fictional protagonist demonstrating the lives of women who are in prison and who have or who are about to give birth to children in prison. Jail Baby was created in partnership with the Elizabeth Fry Society of Manitoba after recognizing the need to share the stories of incarcerated women and women moving in and out of the justice system. Work and research was conducted over 3 years with actual women incarcerated in Alberta and Manitoba. Hope and Cairn held workshops with participants that allowed the research and discussion to be frank and worthy of presenting the stories of incarcerated women. 

While it is not just an Aboriginal story, 1/3 of all women in prison are Aboriginal and it is a too common experience in various segments of society. Activist Sel Burrow feels that prison should be the final answer to issues of poverty, racism and social conditions that too many of these women face. The interesting work of Hope and Cairn is the idea that while in prison rehabilitation needs to occur in order to break the negative support groups that congregate around these women, replacing them with positive support groups.  At the completion of the writing of the play the women who participated were given the chance to review the work, make comments, offer input and act out various scenes. During the production of the play (May 16-23, 2013) many of the women will be present, and there will be a chance to discuss directly with the actors and women afterwards.

Taken from Sarasvàti Productions

Jasmine bursts into the world unlike your typical new born child and is anointed a “jail baby.” Born in prison, raised by a mother who revolves in and out of the correctional system, tossed in and out of foster care, Jasmine is destined to become one of society’s monsters. When she finds herself pregnant and facing her most serious charge yet, Jasmine is horrified at the thought of having her unborn child repeat her life of despair.

Through a series of hilarious parodies, the myths of prison life for incarcerated women are presented and weaved together with Jasmine’s journey. From bad prison B movies to Kangaroo Court, the ensemble of characters turn common beliefs on their heads in order to make the audience question their preconceptions of criminalized women.

Jail Baby

World Premiere
by Hope McIntyre and Cairn Moore
with Nan Fewchuk and Marsha Knight
May 16-26, 2013
Asper Centre for Theatre and Film
(at the University of Winnipeg, 400 Colony Street)
Directed by Ann Hodges
Set/Costume Design by Abigail Myers
Lighting Design by Dean Cowieson
Sound Design by Chris Coyne
Stage Manager Matthew Lagacé
Featuring: Ashley Chartrand, Melanie Dean, Shannon Guile, Daina Leitold, Megan McArton, Tracey Nepinak and Cory Wojcik.

To Learn More (Interview and Podcast)https://archive.org/details/HopeMcintryeMixdown 
https://ia601704.us.archive.org/1/items/HopeMcintryeMixdown/hope%20mcintrye%20mixdown%20.mp3 


Citations

Aboriginal Children Count: A Campaign for Social Justice for Early Education

Kathy Mallett and Wendy Prince are conducting a research project entitled Kiskinwahamkwakewin. This is a cree word which describes the task of education or instruction.   Some of the findings were then taken and developed into the social justice campaign entitled Aboriginal Children Count.  Too often the debates happening around Aboriginal people ignore issues for young children. This campaign is to reach the grassroots and connect with parents and talk about the needs of young children. Further goals include making government more aware about the issues surrounding young children and their specific needs.

There were three stages to their work. The researchers invited families to participate in order to discuss the values they hold and what meaningful people in their lives gave them or taught them those values. The second aspect they asked the parents is what values they actually taught their children and what are the differences between the values they learned and the values they teach to their young children. Wendy and Kathy also asked the families what types of programming they wanted to see in their communities.

As an example Wendy talks about how she would yell at her children to get them to do things. She was mimicking the values in parenting she had learned from her mother, who was also a residential school survivor. Eventually she decided to ask the kids how the felt about the parenting values she was using during a family sharing circle. The children indicated that they did not like this and wanted to see greater respect. Wendy then used more Indigenous parenting techniques to convey her values to her children.  

http://aboriginal.scdsb.edu.on.ca/sevengrandfather.php 

Some of the values that the parents talked about where the seven teaching and other values such as courage, respect, helping one another, eating together, standing independently, language.

To close Kathy said that too often Aboriginal parents are stereotyped as being bad parents, but there are excellent parents who do wonderful work with their children and their research demonstrates that the values that Aboriginal peoples hold as parents are very important and positive and should be used by many different parents.

The researcher have the intent of going into other communities(i.e. William Whyte, St John's neighborhoods) to complete the learning circle portions of the research  in the near future. 

Kathy Mallet is a mother of two adult daughters and a grandmother of three boys and one girl.  Kathy is a band member of the Fisher River Cree Nation, and has lived in the inner-city of Winnipeg since the early 1950s.   In 2008 she received the Grass Roots Women’s Award, and in 2000 she received the first Manitoba Human Rights Commitment Award.  Kathy’s first award came in 1985 when she was recognized for her community work by receiving the YWCA Women of the Year Award in Community Service. Most recently Kathy received the Order of Manitoba on July 11, 2011 and the Grandmothers Keep the Fires Burning award.

Wendy Prince, Cree woman from the Opaskwayak Cree Nation and also familial connections to Peguis First Nation.  Notawiy(mother of three amazing adults), Kohkum (grandmother of two).  Wendy currently supports young parents(13 -23) in the areas of housing, budgeting, educational pursuits, finding appropriate childcare, parenting, and provides 1-1 counseling(i.e grief & loss, self-esteem, family violence, etc.) via the Parenting Student Support Program @ Mount Carmel Clinic. 

To Learn More (Interview and Podcast)

http://archive.org/download/EarlyChildDevelopmentWithKathymalletAndWendyPrince/KathyMalletWendyPrince.mp3  

Citations

Dr Kim Anderson, Life Stages and Native Women: Memory Teachings and Story Medicine

Dr Kim Anderson (Cree/Métis) is an Associate Professor in Indigenous Studies at Wilfrid Laurier University, Brantford. In her new book Life Stages and Native Women, Kim shares the teachings of fourteen elders (Métis, Cree, and Anishinaabe) to illustrate how different life stages were experienced by girls and women during the mid-twentieth century. These elders explore the four life stages of women as they share stories about their own lives, the experiences of girls and women of their childhood communities, and customs related to pregnancy, birth, post-natal care, infant and child care, puberty rites, gender and age-specific work roles, the distinct roles of post-menopausal women, and women’s roles in managing death. By understanding how healthy communities were created in the past, Kim explains how this traditional knowledge can be applied toward rebuilding healthy Indigenous communities today.

To Learn More (Podcast): http://archive.org/download/DrKimAndersonLifeStagesAndNativeWomenMemoryTeachingsAndStory/AtTheEdgeOfCanadaMay31kimAnderson.mp3  

different files
http://archive.org/details/DrKimAndersonLifeStagesAndNativeWomenMemoryTeachingsAndStory

Children's author Peter Eyvindson about Kookum's Red Shoes

This is an interview with children's author Peter Eyvindson about his new book published by Pemmican, called Kookum's Red Shoes. It looks at the story related to Residential Schools and how this history should be introduced to young children and the value of this story.

Peter met an elder grandmother many years ago who was always going to the local school to check on the children. He discovered the reason why she was so protective of the children. As a young child the Kookum was is taken away from her home to live in a residential school. Wanting very much to leave, Kookum decided that only by being good will she be released. After all, Kookum only wants to be with her parents and her baby brother and to wear her bright red shoes. The Shoes had been bought just before the authorities came to take her. Her parents gave her this gift after they had seen the Wizard of Oz in the local small town theatre.

Peter Eyvindson's Kookum's Red Shoes is a story of one girl's strength in the face of oppression. Sheldon Dawson (Illustrator) has provided great pictures in vibrante colors to compliment Kookum's story. My children loved the book so much that they would not put it down.

The discussion talked about the church, how one goes about introducing such a dark story to small children, violence both surface and subsurface (Peter did not have any overt violence in the book), Peter's reasons for wanting to write the story and the length of time it took to find a courageous publisher willing to put this story in print.

To Learn More (interview & Podcast):

http://archive.org/download/ChildrensAuthorPeterEyvindsonAboutKookumsRedShoes/PeterEyvindsonRedShoes.mp3

Marlyn Bennett, Director of Research and Coordinating Editor of First Nations Child and Family Review Journal

This is a 2 part series and conversation with Marlyn Bennett, Director of Research and Coordinating Editor of the First Nations Child and Family Review Journal. Marlyn also works for the First Nations Child & Family Caring Society of Canada (http://www.fncaringsociety.com/ )

The First Nations Child & Family Caring Society of Canada publishes the First Peoples Child & Family Review journal twice a year. The journal is dedicated to interdisciplinary research honouring the voices, perspectives and knowledges of First Peoples through research, critical analyses, stories, standpoints and media reviews. More information about submitting articles may be found on their web-site.

To Learn More: (interview & podcast)
Part I: broadcast April 26, 2012
http://archive.org/download/MarlynBennettDirectorOfResearchAndCoordinatingEditorOfFirstNations/MarleneBennetFnFamilyAndCaringSocietyOfCanadaPart1.mp3 
Part II: broadcast May 3rd, 2012
http://archive.org/download/MarlynBennettDirectorOfResearchAndCoordinatingEditorOfFirstNations_983/MarleneBennetFnFamilyAndCaringSocietyOfCanadaPart2.mp3 
  
Citations