Tansi Nîtôtemtik,
"Under the Stars" by Victoria McKinney. Image retrieved from <https://www.sa-cinn.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/product_POD1748.jpg>.
This week, as we wrap up our discussions on Indigenous child welfare, we are turning our focus to Indigenous community responses and ideas about the way forward – for children, parents, and communities alike. For today’s post, we consider reunification and the best practices (and barriers) that can help ensure (or hinder) a positive outcome for Indigenous children who have been placed within the welfare system. In particular, we refer to Elaine Toombs et al’s article, “First Nations parenting and child reunification: Identifying strengths, barriers, and community needs within the child welfare system”.[1] This article is the culmination of a study undertaken with individuals and focus groups from seven First Nations communities in Ontario to identify and “increase the understanding of the pathways and barriers to reunification of children with their primary caregivers in First Nations communities.”[2]
When discussing reunification, we must be cognizant of the realities of Indigenous communities, and the unique supports and barriers that help or hinder reunification. A necessary first step is to define “reunification” and “family” in a culturally appropriate way. As indicated in the article, child reunification “has been previously defined by placing a child that was previously in out of home care back with their family of origin.”[3] However, this definition relies on a non-Indigenous conception of the “nuclear family” and does not account for the Indigenous conceptualization of family, which “can include additional family members (such as grandparents or aunts) and unrelated community members that are significant to the child.”[4] To limit – or rather, to impose – the concept of reunification in narrow terms is harmful for the children and communities involved. As Toombs et al note, “[w]ith such disparity between non-Indigenous and Indigenous concepts of family, it is unlikely that non-Indigenous policies of reunification adequately reflect Fist Nations children’s needs.”[5]
As indicated in the study, “[r]eunification of a child with their original parent(s) was seen as the primary goal of the child welfare system and recognized as a positive outcome for families.”[6] And yet, in reference to the Indigenous conception of “family”, reunification is “not limited to placing a child back with their original parents or caregivers.”[7] Rather, “placing a child with extended family or with the community was determined as possible options for reunification,” and “was reported as beneficial when parental placement could not be obtained.”[8] Indeed, the study indicates that it should be a priority to keep children within their communities. Participants in the study indicated that “placement within the community better facilitated goals of possible reunification with the child’s parent(s) and allowed parents to have frequent access to the child when possible.” Meanwhile, “[r]emoving the child from the community was cited as the most detrimental outcome for the child due to the disruption felt by the child, separation from familiar people and places, and the lack of community connection.”[9] Community connection can include the community’s cultural practices or traditions (which the child might not have proper access to when placed with a non-Indigenous family), and community supports (such as libraries, band offices, community centres, and community events) which “were deemed to be more helpful where administered by First Nations people, incorporated traditional or cultural elements, and were located within the community.”[10]
Ultimately, the study indicates that the biggest barriers to reunification rest with parenting challenges and community issues (such as mental illness, addictions, and poverty), and the lack of availability or accessibility of parenting services. While many barriers are systematic rather than based on “bad parenting,”[11] the article recognizes the importance of empowerment and self-efficiency – of families and communities alike – within the lives of their children. A strong connection between children, families, and communities rests at the heart of reunification. As we have written about before, a community cannot survive without its children. Likewise, a child cannot survive without their parents, and parents cannot be parents without their children: “How are you going to learn to be a good parent if your child is not there…?”[12] In going forward, the article tells us that First Nations people need to design and implement their own programs, based in their own traditions. This can “increase empowerment and promote community health and connection, which in turn would positively affect parents, children, and their communities.”[13]
Until next time,
Team ReconciliAction YEG
---
To receive daily alerts to the blog, sign up here
Be sure to stay up to date on other happenings with ReconciliAction YEG:
Follow us on Twitter at:@ReconciliYEG
Connect with us on Facebook at: www.facebook.com/reconciliActionYEG/
Check out our Instagram at: @reconciliactionyeg
---
[1] (2018) Child & Family Social Work 23 408-416.
[2] Ibid at 409.
[3] Ibid.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Ibid at 411.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid at 410.
[10] Ibid at 411.
[11] See Ibid at 414.
[12] Ibid at 411.
[13] Ibid at 413.
Recent Comments