Introduction

The overrepresentation of First Nations children in the Canadian child welfare system has been documented since the early 2000s (Trocmé et al., 2004). Between 2009 and 2016, the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Health and Social Services Commission (FNQLHSSC) studied this issue and carried out work demonstrating the overrepresentation of First Nations children in Quebec’s child protection system. Subsequently, the FNQLHSSC conducted qualitative research from 2017 to 2022 and published a report entitled (hereinafter referred to as “Component 4”).

This text focuses on various aspects of this broad subject:

• The current situation regarding the overrepresentation of First Nations children in the Quebec child welfare system.
• -How First Nations perceive child neglect and protection.
• The essential elements of a culturally safe model of prevention and protection services.

Value of children

First Nations view children as having a spiritual value; they are considered as gifts from the Creator and are seen as the future of the nations: “Since Children come from the Creator’s land, so I think they’re very valuable to us, as parents, as grandparents, and that we should treat them with respect and guide them in the right direction” (excerpt from the video Children as Seen by the Elders, FNQLHSSC YouTube channel, 2017).

Background

The 2016 Trajectories of First Nations youth subject to the Youth Protection Act – Component 3: Analysis of mainstream youth protection agencies administrative data, published by the FNQLHSSC, highlighted key findings in relation to the retained reports of neglect and the overrepresentation of First Nations youth in the child protection system.

In 2017, the Quebec Ministère de la Santé et des Services sociaux awarded a research grant to the FNQLHSSC to pursue its work and continue to document and better understand the phenomenon of neglect in the context of First Nations in Quebec.

The data collection for Component 4 of the Analysis of the Trajectories of First Nations Youth Subject to the Youth Protection Act took place from June 2019 to October 2020. It involved 140 people from four communities and one Native friendship centre, as well as a youth protection team from the Quebec network. The results of this research are consistent with those of the report of the Special Commission on the Rights of the Child and Youth Protection (Laurent Commission).

Key points of the analysis

• The concept of neglect has no equivalent in traditional First Nations social structures because meeting the basic needs of children is a responsibility shared by the extended family.
• First Nations’ perspective on neglect is based on a paradigm different from that of non-Indigenous people, mainly due to it arising from a colonization context.
• A situation of neglect or serious risk of neglect cannot be interpreted without taking into account the repercussions of intergenerational trauma on parenthood.
• The Youth Protection Act does not take into consideration the impacts of colonial laws and policies on First Nations parenting.

• The healing of intergenerational trauma, the inclusion of the extended family in the healing process, and the valuation of First Nations parenting skills are avenues to consider for culturally safe services.
• Approaches based on cultural values as well as intervention practices specific to each nation’s culture should be prioritized to ensure culturally safe prevention and protection services.

Findings

By failing to recognize the effects of colonization and structural inequalities on First Nations parenting, the application of the Youth Protection Act and its approaches, methods and tools contribute to maintaining high levels of risk factors leading to reports being retained by youth protection services.

The three research reports published by the FNQLHSSC in 2013 and 2016 related some rather troubling findings. For one, First Nations children are overrepresented at all stages of the youth protection process, even more so when it comes to out-of-home placement (foster families, institutions or group homes). The average rate per 1,000 children is 7.9 times greater for First Nations children compared to non-Indigenous children² and the recurrence (average rate for 1,000 children) was 9.4 times greater for First Nations children compared to non-Indigenous children.

The research also showed that the rate of neglect investigations (per 1,000) for First Nations children was 6.7 times higher than the rate for non-Indigenous children. Of all forms of maltreatment, this was the most significant disparity.

Risk factors

Given the great cultural upheavals caused by assimilation policies and the trauma experienced in residential schools and day schools, studies show that many First Nations families present several risk factors relating to youth protection. There are a greater number of families in poverty, without a stable dwelling, more young parents, a higher rate of parents who have experienced abuse themselves during childhood, as well as a higher rate of parents with substance abuse issues.

Colonial laws and policies have placed First Nations families in a situation of high socio-economic vulnerability. The Canadian Human Rights Tribunal has recognized that the federal government has acted in a discriminatory manner by underfunding First Nations child and family services and has ordered the government to reform its funding system to cover the actual costs of some first-line services for children and families. The services delivered in First Nations communities are still tainted by the underfunding of prevention services and the imposition of a youth protection system whose conceptual approaches and clinical tools contribute to the overrepresentation of First Nations children in the youth protection system.

There is noticeable mistrust among many people who, even with the implementation of prevention services in their community, do not perceive the difference between the various levels of intervention (first and second lines) and do not use these services, for fear of having their children taken away. Thus, we still see, in some communities, family situations that could be resolved with the support of prevention services, but which continue to deteriorate and end up getting reported because the family prefers not to get youth protection involved.

Intergenerational trauma can lead to addiction, mental health and violence issues and it is often linked to a loss of cultural identity, low self-esteem, marginalization and even socio-economic exclusion. The pain gets passed on from generation to generation as those who have experienced trauma do not get the help they need to heal and they continue to carry this burden.

Hope: Protective factors

In order to improve the situation, several communities that have taken over their prevention and youth protection services are rethinking their ways of doing things and are increasingly using methods derived from their cultural heritage. With this shift, First Nations are asserting their right to governance and reaffirming their distinct status, with their own values, approaches and notion of wellness.

In order to improve the situation, several communities that have taken over their prevention and youth protection services are rethinking their ways of doing things and are increasingly using methods derived from their cultural heritage. With this shift, First Nations are asserting their right to governance and reaffirming their distinct status, with their own values, approaches and notion of wellness.

There are several differences between the learning styles of First Nations and non-First Nations people. For example, among First Nations, educational practices based on a “permissive” style are more highly valued than an “authoritarian” or “authoritative” style, which is the norm in the non-Indigenous population. They also tend to learn through an intuitive observation and imitation of the elders’ actions.

Youth protection workers from their communities are familiar with the history and background of families experiencing difficulties. They are often more lenient with youth protection reports because they understand family dynamics and will inform themselves of whether the child’s needs are being met by people other than the immediate parents. This context promotes the provision of culturally safe services, where the community is in charge of all or part of the youth protection services. This enables long-term family support through prevention services or informal caregivers, as well as the use of traditional support and healing approaches and methods.

Which strengths to use?

The revitalization of First Nations languages and cultures is the cornerstone of self-determination and the implementation of a government by and for First Peoples, with structures and powers allowing them to enact new laws, is necessary.

For many First Nations, improving overall wellness involves, among other things, governing their own service offer and modernizing their traditions. After decades of receiving services based on western approaches that have contributed more to an increasing ill-being than wellness, First Nations must rebuild their trust towards these services, even in the case of services offered by and for First Nations.

It is important here to recall and highlight the resilience of elders. Among those who lived through great upheavals and the era of residential schools and day schools, many managed to continue passing on intergenerational knowledge, despite the trauma. As knowledge keepers, elders play a central role in communities currently in the process of taking over their prevention and protection services. They offer their advice, and their approaches are applied in the shift towards a culturally safe service offer.

Proposal: A culturally safe service offer

To support community and organization leaders in their work towards full autonomy and governance of youth welfare services under the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, the report proposes a culturally safe prevention and protection services model for First Nations. This report draws inspiration from the ecosystemic conceptual framework and its various components (chronosystem, society system, nation system, community and territory system, family system and child system), as well as from the tewegan drum.

In this model, children and their needs are placed at the centre of the actions and linked to every ecosystemic component. The leather straps woven into the back stretch the hide and join in the centre to strengthen the whole drum and produce a unique sound. They represent the interdependence between the elements that make up the child’s environment. Whether these elements have a direct or indirect bearing on the child, whether they relate to the past or present, they influence the child’s wellness. Anyone providing youth services must consider these elements in their interventions with First Nations youth and their families. All adults should listen to the children’s emotions (in the intangible world), just as they listen to the sound of the tewegan drum.

To be culturally safe, the services offered through this model take into consideration children’s essential needs through every stage of their development. The knowledge, cultural values and language learned on the land are just as important as the knowledge and skills acquired in a classroom setting. Under this model, the services offered to children and their families are integrated in this holistic vision in which all contextual and temporal factors are interrelated. The yellow circle also contains the word “drum” in different First Nations languages.

A culturally safe service offer cannot really be optimal as long as structural factors, such as inequalities (legal, social, economic, etc.) and systemic racism persist. It is therefore necessary to continue to work with different government levels in various spheres of activity, ensure the implementation of the recommendations and calls for action issued by the various commissions of inquiry, as well as continue research and educational work aimed at breaking the cycle of prejudice and discrimination.