The reason for this, is that the devastating effects of colonization on Canadian indigenous populations has never been properly dealt with, or even acknowledged, by the government. Only just 8 years ago, in June of 2008, did the Prime Minister even offer an apology for the abduction of indigenous children and their placement into residential schools, let alone the other devastating government actions that occurred (CBCnews, 2008). The main reason why “[indigenous] children and families are more likely to experience poverty, live in unsafe and inadequate housing, be unemployed, rely on social assistance, and experience substance abuse” (Schormans, 2016) is because of the after-effects of overtly racist colonization practices and current paternalistic legislation which ignores and continues the devastation of indigenous peoples (Trocmé et al., 2004, p. 594). However, the moral model of help ignores the situational factors and assigns the blame to indigenous parents for the neglect of their children. Thus, the government does not feel that they are responsible for dealing with the socio-economic factors that actually cause many indigenous families to struggle to care for their children and feel morally superior in the help that they do provide. Of course, this begs the question, is help from a paternalistic government that refuses to accept responsibility for, and acknowledge, the impact of their destructive actions, really helpful at all? The focus of this paper will be on exploring the historical context of government intervention with indigenous children, why current legislature has done little to mitigate the disproportionate number of indigenous children in child welfare care, and how the moral model of help shapes government relations with indigenous families living in
The reason for this, is that the devastating effects of colonization on Canadian indigenous populations has never been properly dealt with, or even acknowledged, by the government. Only just 8 years ago, in June of 2008, did the Prime Minister even offer an apology for the abduction of indigenous children and their placement into residential schools, let alone the other devastating government actions that occurred (CBCnews, 2008). The main reason why “[indigenous] children and families are more likely to experience poverty, live in unsafe and inadequate housing, be unemployed, rely on social assistance, and experience substance abuse” (Schormans, 2016) is because of the after-effects of overtly racist colonization practices and current paternalistic legislation which ignores and continues the devastation of indigenous peoples (Trocmé et al., 2004, p. 594). However, the moral model of help ignores the situational factors and assigns the blame to indigenous parents for the neglect of their children. Thus, the government does not feel that they are responsible for dealing with the socio-economic factors that actually cause many indigenous families to struggle to care for their children and feel morally superior in the help that they do provide. Of course, this begs the question, is help from a paternalistic government that refuses to accept responsibility for, and acknowledge, the impact of their destructive actions, really helpful at all? The focus of this paper will be on exploring the historical context of government intervention with indigenous children, why current legislature has done little to mitigate the disproportionate number of indigenous children in child welfare care, and how the moral model of help shapes government relations with indigenous families living in