Residential schools where started off in Canada around the pre-Confederation times, but were primarily implemented following the Indian Act of 1876. The Indian Act of 1867 allowed the Crown to place a lot of restrictions on status Indian’s and these restrictions included how their children would be receive formal education. The Indian residential schools in Canada were boarding schools administered by the churches in Canada and funded by the state. The churches involved included Roman Catholic, Anglican Church and Presbyterian Church. Residential schools are commonly known as having being introduced with the intention of educating, assimilating and integrating the Aboriginal people into the western culture and Canadian society. According to the government in those days, the objective was to “kill the Indian in the child.” However in the process of trying to rid the child of their Indian culture and ethnicity, residential school system perpetually committed cultural genocide and the effects would be seen on generations to come. In 2009, the Canadian prime minister, Stephen Harper; offered a long awaited and much needed apology to the Aboriginal communities within Canada. Harper referred to the residential school era as a “sad chapter in our history, that need not have occurred” (Harper, 2008) While the Canadian governments public apology was a step in the right direction, many, from a more critical lens, have referred to the residential school system as a cultural genocide instead of a “mere sad chapter in our history” However, while the Canadian government tries to shy away from such an allegation, the impact of the residential school system on Aboriginals should not be viewed lightly. This p... ... middle of paper ... ...son (2012). The Genocide Question and Indian Residential Schools in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 45, pp 427- Canada. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Volume 1: Looking Forward, Looking Back. Chapter 10, "Residential Schools." Ottawa: Supply and Services Canada, 1996. Fournier, Suzanne and Ernie Crey. Stolen from our Embrace: The Abduction of First Nations Children and the Restoration of Aboriginal Communities. Vancouver: Douglas & McIntyre, 1997. Haig-Brown, Celia. Resistance and Renewal: Surviving the Indian Residential School. Vancouver: Arsenal Pulp Press, 1998. First published by Tillicum Library, 1988. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pm-cites-sad-chapter-in-apology-for-residential-schools- http://www.ahf.ca/downloads/misconceptions.pdf 449. doi:10.1017/S000842391200039X.
The validity of this generalization can be evidenced by the moral, political, constitutional and practical concerns that shaped national Indian policy between 1789 and the mid-1830’s.
In 1887 the federal government launched boarding schools designed to remove young Indians from their homes and families in reservations and Richard Pratt –the leader of Carlisle Indian School –declared, “citizenize” them. Richard Pratt’s “Kill the Indian… and save the man” was a speech to a group of reformers in 1892 describing the vices of reservations and the virtues of schooling that would bring young Native Americans into the mainstream of American society.
In the mid-19th century, Britain was facing problems of over populated cities. Life for the poor class was incredibly difficult. To survive, children as young as _____ had to find work to bring in money for food and shelter. In such families young children were seen as a burden and older ones as a source of income. Oftentimes unexpected circumstances such as sickness would leave families unable to support themselves. Orphaned children took to the streets or were put in parishes by closest kin which were not much better than the streets. Slowly people started to take notice of their plight. Both newly formed and pre-established philanthropic agencies began bringing in children and apprenticing them. Homes like Barnardo, Rye, and Macpherson Homes were set up all over Britain to accommodate them. Hundreds of families would admit their own children to the Homes when they could no longer provide for them. With this overwhelming response, the child savers soon had more children than they could handle; they began searching for a place to send them.
You simply cannot justify ripping a child from a loving home and stripping them of their culture and placing them in prison like dormitories where you attempt to “civilize” them. Deculturaliztion will never be a right or just act. Decades later the Native Americans are still picking up the pieces from the wrecking ball that was the Indian Boarding School experience.
The history of Indian Child Welfare Act derived from the need to address the problems with the removal of Indian children from their communities. Native American tribes identified the problem of Native American children being raised by non-native families when there were alarming numbers of children being removed from their h...
Before the Indian Child Welfare Act was passed, Congress discovered a startling statistic. 25-30% of all American-Indian children were taken from their families custody and placed with non-Indian families (Fletcher). It is impractical to believe that that many American-Indian families were inadequate to have children in their care. Even after they were taken away, the government took no interest in the child’s cultural identity and placed them with families outside the tribe, where they were never exposed to their native culture. After the ICWA was passed and Indian families were kept together, many long-term benefits appeared: Security, pride in heritage, and participation in the use of cultural norms (Cross). When the Indian children were being placed within their tribes instead of with people of other ethnic backgrounds, the children grew up immersed in their families culture and grew up to practice it themselves. They learned where their
Our Indian legislation generally rests on the principle, that the aborigines are to be kept in a condition of tutelage and treated as wards or children of the State. …the true interests of the aborigines and of the State alike require...
During the 19th century the Canadian government established residential schools under the claim that Aboriginal culture is hindering them from becoming functional members of society. It was stated that the children will have a better chance of success once they have been Christianised and assimilated into the mainstream Canadian culture. (CBC, 2014) In the film Education as We See It, some Aboriginals were interviewed about their own experiences in residential schools. When examining the general topic of the film, conflict theory is the best paradigm that will assist in understanding the social implications of residential schools. The film can also be illustrated by many sociological concepts such as agents of socialization, class inequality, and language as a cultural realm.
The Indian Act no longer remains an undisputable aspect of the Aboriginal landscape in Canada. For years, this federal legislation (that was both controversial and invasive) governed practically all of the aspects of Aboriginal life, starting with the nature of band governance and land tenure. Most importantly, the Indian act defines qualifications of being a “status Indian,” and has been the source of Aboriginal hatred, due to the government attempting to control Aboriginals’ identities and status. This historical importance of this legislation is now being steadily forgotten. Politically speaking, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal critics of the Indian act often have insufferable opinions of the limits of the Indian Act’s governance, and often argue to have this administrative device completely exterminated. Simultaneously, recent modern land claim settlements bypass the authority of the Indian Act over specific groups.
The Indian Residential schools and the assimilating of First Nations people are more than a dark spot in Canada’s history. It was a time of racist leaders, bigoted white men who saw no point in working towards a lasting relationship with ingenious people. Recognition of these past mistakes, denunciation, and prevention steps must be taking intensively. They must be held to the same standard that we hold our current government to today. Without that standard, there is no moving forward. There is no bright future for Canada if we allow these injustices to be swept aside, leaving room for similar mistakes to be made again. We must apply our standards whatever century it was, is, or will be to rebuild trust between peoples, to never allow the abuse to be repeated, and to become the great nation we dream ourselves to be,
The creation of the Residential Schools is now looked upon to be a regretful part of Canada’s past. The objective: to assimilate and to isolate First Nations and Aboriginal children so that they could be educated and integrated into Canadian society. However, under the image of morality, present day society views this assimilation as a deliberate form of cultural genocide. From the first school built in 1830 to the last one closed in 1996, Residential Schools were mandatory for First Nations or Aboriginal children and it was illegal for such children to attend any other educational institution. If there was any disobedience on the part of the parents, there would be monetary fines or in the worst case scenario, trouble with Indian Affairs.
Bell hooks knows about the challenges of race and class, and why some people have a harder time than others in achieving the American Dream. It is normal to feel uncomfortable and awkward arriving at a new school for the first time, but this was something completely different. For bell hooks, walking through the halls with eyes staring at her as if she was an alien, she realized that schooling for her would never be the same. She describes her feelings of inequality a...
The Indian Act is a combination of multiple legislations regarding the Aboriginal people who reside across Canada, such as the Gradual Civilization Act of 1857 and the Gradual Enfranchisement Act of 1869 (Hanson, n.p.). The Gradual Civilization Act was the Canadian government's attempt to assimilate the aboriginals into the Canadian society in a passive manner, through a method they encouraged called Enfranchisement. Enfranchisement is basically a legal process that allows aboriginals to give up their aboriginal status and accept a Canadian status (Crey, n.p.). This process, while under the Gradual Civilization Act, was still voluntary, but became a forced process when the Indian Act was consolidated in 1876 (Hanson, n.p.). The Gradual Enfranchisement Act introduced in 1869 was a major legislation that intruded with the private lives of the aboriginals. First, it established the “elective band council system” (Hanson, n.p.) that grants th...
The Indian Child Welfare Act was passed in 1978 to “‘promote the best interests of Indian children and promote the stability and security of Indian tribes’” (“Indian Child”). Congress gave tribal courts exclusive control over the adoption and custody of Indian children who live in their tribes’ reservations to prevent the practice of Indian children being removed from their homes (“Indian Child”). Even though some suggest the ICWA is racist and increases the risk of child abuse, the law should remain in place with no significant changes because it helps children’s mental health by connecting them to their culture.
The Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 was the New Deal for the Indian nation. The new policy was intended to ease the injustices that the Indians suffered at the hands of government. It was intended to stop the practice of forcing Indians to assimilate into western society (erasing their Indian identity and culture), as well as forcing them to live on reservations that were too small to sustain them (Kennedy, pg. 379).