Replacing the System

I have noticed, over the course of my life, that when one government program is deemed to be not acceptable by those how it seeks to serve, it is often replaced with another ill-serving system. An example of this is the system of making individuals with disabilities dependent on Social Assistance, although this system does not at all meet their needs. As this program is seen as unacceptable, a new program called Saskatchewan Assured Income for Disability has been created. At the moment, this system has no marked differences from Social Assistance. It does not serve to meet the needs of the individuals in a markedly better manner. The only observable difference is that this new program does not carry with it the stigma that the welfare program does.

The renaming of programs was certainly the case when the residential school system was deemed as unsuitable to meet the needs of the First Nations peoples, as well as a failure in meeting its goals, and simply transformed into the present child welfare system. The child welfare system continues to be based on Euro-centric values, as residential schools were, and does not take into consideration Aboriginal values and worldviews (Blackstock, Brown, & Bennett, 2007). There is no acknowledgement that it was the imposition of European values that forced First Nations in economic poverty and made it difficult for families to provide for their children. This socio-economic displacement has led to more children being taken into care than were ever a part of the residential school system. The long-term impacts of the welfare system on children are very similar to the effects of the residential school system as neither system has the ability to address needs in a holistic manner (Blackstock, et al, 2007).

The child welfare system also replaced residential schools in the respect that the after effects of the welfare system are very similar to that of residential schools. Many of those who are a part of the welfare system suffer emotional and psychological side effects that place them at a higher risk of perpetuating cycles of high-risk behavior (Trocme, et al, 2006). It is necessary to break out of this cycle of unnecessary government involvement in the lives of First Nations communities. It has been proven that First Nations communities with high levels of self-sovereignty are most able to successfully support their children (Blackstock, et al., 2007). To continue to address the issues of inequality and reduce the level of government involvement in First Nations families, self-government needs to be addressed. This process should be given more support by both federal and provincial governments in order to create communities that are no longer dependent, but able to function within their own values and worldview.

References

Blackstock, C., et al. (2007). Reconciliation: Rebuilding the Canadian child welfare system to better serve Aboriginal children and youth. In I. Brown, et at., (Eds.), Purring a human face on child welfarE: Voices from the Prairies, (59-87). Regina: PCWC.

Trocmé, N., et al. (2006). Catching a drop of light. Toronto: Centre of Excellence for Child Welfare.