6 minute read

The “Sixties Scoop” & its Dismantling of Indigenous Motherhood

The “Sixties Scoop” and Its Dismantling of Indigenous Motherhood

First Nations, Metis, and Inuit children were ‘scooped’ from their homes by the Government of Canada beginning in the 1960s, although it was 1983 when Patrick Johnson created the term “Sixties Scoop.”1 The term ‘scooped’ is putting it gently. Children were apprehended, separated from their siblings, and stripped of their culture.2 The child welfare systems established by the government removed Indigenous children, placed them in nonIndigenous homes, and stripped them of their culture. The 1964 Annual Citizenship Reports record that the welfare services used the term ‘adoption’ to describe their actions.3 The numbers of children being scooped from their homes steadily increased. In 1958 the total number of Indigenous children taken was 871 but increased to 1,159 the following year.4 The apprehension of Indigenous children created intergenerational impacts, by preventing the transmission of culture from elders to children. The child welfare systems claimed to be working in the ‘best interest of the child’; this was far from the reality.5 Indigenous adults who were ‘scooped’ from their homes have reported experiences of severe trauma and abuse, have questioned their identity, and have exhibited behavioral trouble.6

Advertisement

The norms of Indigenous mothers differed from those of settler society. They were not confined to the private sphere, because their domestic work was extended to the public sphere where women were active members of the community.7 Each Indigenous community has unique practices. However, several Indigenous communities share the commonality that “express joint responsibilities and mutual respect amongst genders to meet the

Saskatchewan’s Adopt Indian and Metis Program, late 1960s, Discourse Magazine, Fair use.

goals of locally defined well-being.”8 It is evident that traditionally Indigenous mothers were honoured and respected within their communities.9 The roles of Indigenous women were anchored to the foundation of egalitarian and deeply spiritual societies Indigenous peoples pride themselves on.10 They were “wisdom-keepers; they taught children”11 about leadership, peacekeeping, healing, and care of the environment.12 In many communities Indigenous women “engaged in activities historically associated with men in order to… strengthen tribal culture.”13 These women exemplified great strength and independence. The settler society gained control over the Indigenous peoples in the late nineteenth century, as they began to force their “Western configurations of gender that favor[ed] patriarchal structures”14 upon Indigenous communities. The “unity and cohesion of Indigenous communities”15 was undermined through colonial genocides such as the Indian Residential Schools. The settler society forced its values and beliefs on the Indigenous peoples, who were “deemed less than fully human”16 and in need of improvement. This contributed to the belief that Indigenous women held no value.17 The settler society where men were dominant figures and women lost status soon trickled into the Indigenous lives.18 The Indian Residential Schools were organized to assimilate Indigenous children into settler culture, operating from 1861 to 1984, targeting over 150,000 Indigenous children.19 The schools were advertised as places where children “would receive the care of a mother and an education that would prepare them for a life in modernizing Canada.”20 The lived experience of children at the IRS were far from the advertisements. Indigenous children were separated from their siblings,

prohibited from speaking their native language and practicing their cultures traditions.21 The Indigenous children were psychologically, mentally, and sexually abused while at the schools. The so-called modern education promised by the IRS instead was used to sever Indigenous children’s ties to their community and culture and as a “means to absorb them into a dominant society.”22 The IRS has resulted in intergenerational impacts and incomprehensible trauma.23

The family structure within settler societies traditionally tasked women and mothers with the expressive role; and men with the instrumental role.24 The dominant ideology of post-World War II motherhood valued the white middle-class mother who faced few negative socio-economic factors and lived to take care of her family.25 Mothers were expected to look after their children and “accept the responsibility of managing a household and building a happy home.”26 This ideology kept mothers in an unequal submissive position and “became the standard against which… those outside the ideal [such as Indigenous mothers]…were measured and judged.”27 The traditional role of Indigenous motherhood was looked down upon as it was far from the dominant ideology.28 The dominant ideology of motherhood during the mid-twentieth century contributed to the dismantling of Indigenous mothers’ traditional roles. The government’s establishment of child welfare systems was an extension of the IRS and cultural genocide against the Indigenous peoples and in this case motherhood. The removal of children from Indigenous homes from the 1950s until the 1990s is an

example of the patriarchal society’s assimilation of Indigenous communities and devaluation of Indigenous mothers. Mothers who fell into categories of the marginalized, impoverished, women of colour, etc. were targeted when they failed to live up to this ideal. They were considered unfit or bad mothers because they worked outside the home, were part of the public sphere, or had focuses other than their family. Ultimately these ‘bad mothers’ did not live up to the ideal of the middle-class white mother.29 Indigenous women have been marginalized because of their gender, race, and living conditions, leaving them more vulnerable to being labelled as unfit mothers, because they did not meet the standards of the dominant ideology of motherhood.30 The themes of discrimination, poverty and systemic barriers these mothers faced was not their fault. Yet that is what attracted the ‘concerns’ of the welfare systems. The child welfare systems were responsible for “the removal and institutionalization”31 of Indigenous children and the representation of Indigenous women as incapable in their roles as mothers.

The dominant patriarchal society placed its own concerns over those of the Indigenous peoples; this threatened children’s identity and ties to their culture.32 Even after Indigenous children were adopted and their mothers sought to regain custody, the voices of the Indigenous mothers were pushed aside.33 The child welfare systems and IRS rejected the traditional practices of Indigenous communities defining them as uncivilized and “inferior parenting.”34 The living conditions of Indigenous children were valued over their identity and culture. Instead of forcing the dominant colonized ideology of motherhood on Indigenous women, deeming them as unfit, then removing children from their homes, settler society could have supported the mothers, families, and communities, creating solutions to improve the conditions that viewed mothers as inadequate in their roles as the primary caregiver.35 In 1981, the Canadian Government gave authorization to First Nations and Métis communities to administer child welfare services.36 Indigenous child and family services focused on placing children with extended family, or Indigenous members of the community. This helped foster the child’s cultural and religious heritage. Since then agreements have been signed giving Indigenous communities the authority to provide child welfare services.37

The last decade has consisted of working towards the Sixties Scoop Class Action. The National Settlement between the Canadian Government and the Sixties Scoop Survivors was approved in 2018, which marked a step towards resolution and solace. The loss of Indigenous children’s cultural identity was traumatic, and the government failed to protect the children.38 The survivors who are referred to as ‘Eligible Class Members’ will receive compensation when their settlement is finalized. The details of the settlement and how it will proceed is still in the works. The story of the Sixties Scoop exemplifies the continuous entitlement of power that settler society has imposed on Indigenous peoples, especially Indigenous women. As a non-Indigenous person, I hope this article has amplified the Indigenous voices that have been belittled.

Grace K. English (she/her)

Education major, Gender Studies minor

F E A T U R E

This article is from: