Canadian Roots Exchange

Who are the Canadian Roots Exchange?

"Ever thought that a group of youth could change our country?"

We did. Still do, actually.

We are the Canadian Roots Exchange, a group of Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth who believe that in order to bridge the gap between Canada's peoples, we need to become educated and aware of the teachings, triumphs, and daily realities of our Indigenous communities. 

So, together we gather, travel and bring together youth in cities, towns, and traditional territories across Canada in an effort to break down stereotypes, open a dialogue, and build honest relationships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people living on this land.

The Program

The Canadian Roots Exchange is registered charity (registration number 832296602RR0001) that provides Indigenous based leadership, learning and reconciliation experiences to every youth that participates in our programs. CRE organizes three main types of activities:  exchange programs, workshops and conferences.  Central to CRE programming is the need to bring together Indigenous and non-Indigenous youth.  Regardless of the activity, we believe that having dialogue is necessary to foster understanding and reconciliation.

check out there cool video from vimeo. 

<iframe src="//player.vimeo.com/video/43420053"width="500" height="281" webkitallowfullscreenmozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe> 

http://canadianroots.ca/en/photos-videos/?gallery=videos#!prettyPhoto[videos]/2/ 

Aboriginal Education: Canada's Two Real Solitudes

Aboriginal Education Best Practises

There is a continuing debate about Aboriginal education based on very different ideas about what is best for the children, Aboriginal peoples, Canadians and Canada. On one hand you have the idea that Aboriginal peoples need to integrate into Canadian society by having the same types of education as all other Canadian children. Aboriginal education is seen as being wishy-washy, short on ideas, hard to understand, providing little useful marketable skills, less rigorous than a western education, building to the lowest common denominator, an off-shoot of current educational experts (John Dewey descendants) attempts at child centered education that water down the great traditions of Western culture and civilization; it is simply a path that is not an advancement in education, but at worst a regression and at minimum a waste of time and money in feel good activities. Are these accusations fair?

Chief John Snow (Wesley Band of the Stoney Nakoda Sioux First nation) wrote in the 1977 that we should have a different type of education in Canada, one based on integration. “Of course I believe in integrated education. Let the neighbouring communities bring their children onto our reserve and we’ll do our best to integrate them” (book These mountains are our sacred places). While many would not see this comment as being serious Chief Snow was expressing the exact same view point that many non-Aboriginal peoples held concerning Aboriginal peoples.  Many Indigenous peoples in Canada believe that a separate Indigenized education system with access to similar resources as public system is not only necessary, but a Human Right (Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of HR). Others like Elder Winston Wuttunee are more pragmatic and hold that all students and humans should have access to the teaching of Indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples have a duty to build understanding within all students. They have this duty because of their special connection to the land, earth and creation. We have as Winston says “a special role to play.”

Few actually understand many of ideas and the historical developments surrounding Aboriginal education. The idea of Aboriginal education as a separate field of study while it has gained currency as an area of expertise has not been wholly embraced. I was once told that the former Dean of Education at McGill did not believe in this field of study (anonymous personal communication). It is an area of education that is difficult to discuss do to potential accusations of racism and the high emotional issues that surround it. Many quietly question Aboriginal education as being a watering down of the standards that will enable students to obtain knowledge and skills useful for employment.

Though perhaps it is true that non-Native children should be taught in an Indigenous manner and Chief Snow has it right. Very few cultures in the world such as the Indigenous peoples in Canada have been able to demonstrate the high capacity for survival. The First Nations world-view has demonstrated stamina that even though it has been attacked, harassed and victimized it has still persisted to this day and in many cases is undergoing a revival and renaissance. Some have even called this interaction a form of genocide (Justice Murray Sinclair, Feb 17, 2012).

The debates about Aboriginal education run quite the gamut from institutions like the University of Manitoba promoting student support programs, to the Frontier Centre advocating a different Indian Control of Indian Education controlled not by chiefs and reserves, but by parents or even using a voucher system, to the First Nations University of Canada. Few though ask what we are trying to do; what are the intended outcomes, our long term goal. Some like the Dean of Extended Education at the U of Manitoba indicate that students outcomes must be tied to educational success and educational success is graduation from university; and this is the principal measure of success. Others like Aboriginal educator Audrey Richard write that success should be much more holistic taking into account not only academic success, but the way the student works and lives after they have completed some educational training. Other educational programs like the Le,Nonet program at U Victoria also discuss how students see success and it is generally it would be considered far more holistic.

It is certainly a very difficult area to make sense because of the many entrenched interests that often preclude the finding of solutions that meet the educational and holistic objectives of students, families, and communities.  

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

Corrections Canada and the Coming Tsunami of Youth in Prison

 

Here is an interview I did with Radio-Canada journalist Claudine Richard-Beaudoin about the terrible state of Canadian prisons and the over representation of Aboriginal peoples in that system.  HTTP://www.radio-canada.ca/emissions/midi_plus_manitoba/2012-2013/chronique.asp?idChronique=279078

March 8th, 2013

Howard Saper, the Correctional Investigator tabled a report (7 March 2013) with the Canadian Parliament. The report, entitled Spirit Matters:  Aboriginal People and the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, examines the implementation of Sections 81 and 84 provisions of the CCRA.  Section 81 allows the Minister of Public Safety to enter into agreements to transfer care and custody of an Aboriginal offender who would otherwise be held in a federal penitentiary to an Aboriginal community facility.  Section 84 provides for Aboriginal communities to be involved in the release of an Aboriginal offender returning to their community. Nothing in the report is new except that the tough on crime approach may not be working. I see the report as indicating that we are creating the potential of a tsunami of under privileged young people (Aboriginal) who will eventually be sent to Canadian prisons. We should remember that this is the youngest population in Canada. Perhaps it is time to consider more traditional models of being more intelligent on crime. While no one likes criminals, eventually a criminal has the right to live in society. It should be the task of Corrections Canada to ensure that people when they leave prison have the skills to make a life for themselves on the outside. Too many people learn bad things in prison and it becomes a way of life. Many young men in the Aboriginal community feel that they are destined for the Criminal courts. How can we prevent young people from becoming involved in the system. We are seeing that too many institutional systems are failing too many of our fellow citizens. The education system is not meeting the needs of children and in the case of Aboriginal peoples they have schools which are under funded by 30-40%. The Child and Family services are also failing our youngest citizens. When we see the cases like Phoenix Sinclairs’ which are in my mind the tip of the iceberg, we must be concerned. Children have a destiny in life and positive destiny, but we are the adult can affect that destiny and reduce the potential for the success of all out children. 

While many see underprivileged children as not being their children, they still have value. We often ask what we can do. These children will exist along side us in society. We will see them in the streets, in supermarkets, on the bus and potentially in our cities. While Howard Sapers said he could not comment on the processes that go on outside of correction facilities I can and I see a direct correlation. My quality of life is affected by the quality of life of all children in Canada. Every person who is in prison is a failure of the Canadian state to ensure that all citizens’ Human Rights have been respected and they have been given the options to make good personal choices in life. No man is an Island and we cannot shut ourselves away from the world. By being tough on crime, we must be smart and eradicate crime before it starts. Childhood poverty should be eliminated and we will see cost savings in our prisons and improvements to the Canadian politic in one generation.