Pace yourself, it is later than you think.

Intergenerational Impacts

The unresolved trauma of Aboriginal people who experienced or witnessed physical or sexual abuse in the residential school system is passed on from generation to generation. The ongoing cycle of intergenerational abuse in Aboriginal communities is the legacy of physical and sexual abuse in residential schools.

The definition of intergenerational impacts and the legacy of residential schools abuse follows:

“Intergenerational Impacts” refer to “the effects of physical and sexual abuse that were passed on to the children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren of Aboriginal people who attended the residential school system.”

Please see the list below of impacts that intergenerational Survivors face on a day-to-day basis:
1. Alcohol and drug abuse;
2. Fetal alcohol syndrome (FAS) and fetal alcohol effect (FAE);
3. Sexual abuse (past and ongoing);
4. Physical abuse (past and ongoing; especially, but not exclusively, of women and children);
5. Psychological/emotional abuse;
6. Low self-esteem;
7. Dysfunctional families and interpersonal relationships;
8. Parenting issues such as emotional coldness, rigidity, neglect, poor communications and abandonment;
9. Suicide (and the threat of suicide);
10. Teen pregnancy;
11. Chronic, widespread depression;
12. Chronic, widespread rage and anger;
13. Eating disorders;
14. Sleeping disorders;
15. Chronic physical illness related to spiritual and emotional states;
16. Layer upon layer of unresolved grief and loss;
17. Fear of personal growth, transformation and healing;
18. Unconscious internalization of residential school behaviours such as false politeness, not speaking out, passive compliance, excessive neatness, obedience without thought, etc.;
19. Post-residential school community environment, seen in patterns of paternalistic authority linked to passive dependency; patterns of misuse of power to control others, and community social patterns that foster whispering in the dark, but refusing to support and stand with those who speak out or challenge the status quo;
20. The breakdown of the social glue that holds families and communities together, such as trust, common ground, shared purpose and direction, a vibrant ceremonial and civic life, co-operative networks and associations working for the common good, etc.;
21. Disunity and conflict between individuals, families and factions within the community;
22. Flashbacks and associative trauma; i.e., certain smells, foods, sounds, sights and people trigger flashbacks memories, anxiety attacks, physical symptoms or fear; e.g. the sight of a certain type of boat or vehicle (especially containing a social worker or RCMP), the sight of an old residential school building, etc;
23. Educational blocks – aversions to formal learning programs that seem “too much like school,” fear of failure, self-sabotage, psychologically-based learning disabilities;
24. Spiritual confusion; involving alienation from one’s own spiritual life and growth process, as well as conflicts and confusion over religion;
25. Internalized sense of inferiority or aversion in relation to whites and especially whites in power;
26. Toxic communication – backbiting, gossip, criticism, put downs, personal attacks, sarcasm, secrets, etc.;
27. Becoming oppressors and abusers of others as a result of what was done to one in residential schools;
28. Dysfunctional family co-dependent behaviours replicated in the workplace;
29. Cultural identity issues – missionization and the loss of language and cultural foundations has led to denial (by some) of the validity of one’s own cultural identity (assimilation), a resulting cultural confusion and dislocation;
30. Destruction of social support networks (the cultural safety net) that individuals and families in trouble could rely upon;
31. Disconnection from the natural world (i.e. the sea, the forest, the earth, living things) as an important dimension of daily life and hence spiritual dislocation;
32. Voicelessness – entailing a passive acceptance of powerlessness within community life and a loss of traditional governance processes that enabled individuals to have a significant influence in shaping community affairs (related to the psychological need of a sense of agency, i.e. of being able to influence and shape the world one lives in, as opposed to passively accepting whatever comes and feeling powerless to change it.

Many generations of Inuit, Métis and First Nation children spent the greater part of their childhood in residential schools. The abuse and neglect they suffered while there left its mark on their adult lives, as well as the lives of their descendants whose families have been characterized by further abuse and neglect.

As adults, many Survivors of residential school abuse found themselves struggling alone with the pain, rage and grief of unresolved trauma. Those who sought escape through marriage or domestic partnerships were often overwhelmed by the complex demands of intimacy, parenting and family life, without previous experience of it or preparation for its demands. Some were also re-victimized by domestic violence or became, themselves, the abusers of their partners, children or parents.

“Intergenerational or multi-generational trauma happens when the effects of trauma are not resolved in one generation. When trauma is ignored and there is no support for dealing with it, the trauma will be passed from one generation to the next. What we learn to see as “normal” when we are children, we pass on to our own children. Children who learn that … or [sic] sexual abuse is “normal”, and who have never dealt with the feelings that come from this, may inflict physical and sexual abuse on their own children. The unhealthy ways of behaving that people use to protect themselves can be passed on to children, without them even knowing they are doing so. This is the legacy of physical and sexual abuse in residential schools.”
(Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 1999:A5)

Some residential school Survivors escaped into the military, but became further affected by combat trauma or discriminatory treatment. Others self-medicated their pain through addictions or substance abuse. Gang and drug-related violence, homelessness and poverty began to grow. Those in conflict with the law risked re-victimization through police brutality.

Unresolved trauma from residential school abuse continues to impact individuals, families, communities and nations and will do so until it can be expressed, validated and released in healthy, creative ways.

References: Aboriginal Healing Foundation (1999). Aboriginal Healing Foundation Program Handbook, 2nd Edition. Ottawa: Aboriginal Healing Foundation.

Here is another link:

http://www.cbc.ca/national/blog/video/aboriginal_issues/native_lands_part_3.html

I found this link while I was doing some research. Thought some of you might be interested in the video clip.

http://archives.cbc.ca/society/education/topics/692/

I REALLY DISLIKE INTRODUCTIONS! To me they are the most superficial way of getting to know anybody. But we have to start somewhere, right?

Every time I am asked to introduce myself in a classroom I feel like an idiot. For one I really am not ready to talk about myself in front of a number of people that I do not know. Secondly, I feel that when I speak 95% of the people in the room are not really listening- so why waste my breath (I mostly mean in a university classroom). Introductions are nothing but a ‘polite’ social convention, and I’m talking about introductions in person- the formal handshake, eye contact, and the little spiel- “my name is, I like to, I do this, I work at, I study this, single, married…”.

The method of introduction for Aruna’s class was refreshing. For one I was not forced to talk about myself in front of people who really didn’t care to hear about it. If they wanted to learn something about me they could go to my blog and read up! Another cool thing about the intro’s for our class was the fact that we were not put on the spot. We were given the opportunity to go home and think about what we wanted to write, what we wanted others to know about us. I do wonder about the format though. Why “three generations”? Why not leave the introductions open to anything?

Now back to this superficial introduction business. I was raised as a Catholic and from time to time I will go to church with my parent’s, not because I’m religious or support religious institutions, but because it makes my parents happy. So on a Sunday morning (months ago) I went to church with the folks. During the mass the new priest of the parish decided to introduce himself for 35 minutes. I timed him. As a Sheppard talking to a herd of sheep, he spoke about how great, how cultured, how educated, and how ‘worldly’ he is. Thirty-five minutes! No joke. I really had NO interest in what he had to say, but I listened because I was amazed by his great opinion of himself. It was actually very entertaining. I bring this up because I think we can get to know a person (or a glimpse of them) by listening to the ‘way’ they introduce themselves. Some people will rant about who they are for hours, without realizing that nobody actually cares. Others will not say much without realizing that others actually want to know more. Some will introduce you to the deepest parts of themselves immediately, hiding nothing. Where as others we do not get to know until years later. To me the fascinating thing about introductions is not their content but in what form they are presented.

“In parallel, the things “we” write about are: Our oppression, Our experiences as drunks and druggies and prostitutes, how we miraculously Found Our Culture and got healed, and Eagles and/or Bears and/ or Wolves. And if one doesn’t write about these things? One hears that their work is not Native enough. This one has heard that, and can only respond: Why should I only accept the certain of my experiences are valid and useful and Native? Did “we”- Aboriginal people- decide that there were only a few valid patterns for our lives as Natives? And that these patterns must involve a quota of particular kinds of suffering? And that, now we have not lived up to our billing as a Vanishing Race, our new role is a culturally bereft remainder, pleading to be given back our dignity?
Must we always go on about how we’re doing carrying the Whiteman’s Burden?- because if that’s the case, I’m out of it. And I’ll stay out. And this is not because I don’t know the weight of it. It because something good might happen for us if we just put it down for a moment, that burden. We could poke a hole in it, and let the air out of a tired old sack of an idea that has had its day” (21)

What Anne Sewell writes above is something that I have felt on numerous occasions, but honestly as a White female I have been scared to say it, afraid to insult a community of people. Afraid to speak! To speak! But I’m sick of being a chicken shit, so here are my thoughts:

Often I ask myself why I define Native art forms as a depiction of struggle. And I think the answer to that is because often that is the way the art is presented to me (when I speak of art in this case I am referring to literature). Now (more so than before) writers from the Native community are able to speak on behalf of their community. A writer’s role is extremely important, it’s a powerful role. However, I also think that a writer has a responsibility-a responsibility to deliver the truth about a culture, rather than create more negative stereotypes. When I read Sewell’s article I thought of King’s: “You’re Not The Indian I Had In Mind”. If all Native writers write about oppression, alcoholism, colonialism, prostitution, bears, wolves etc. that will become the association to Native Literature. Native Literature will become another version of Curtis’s photos, photos fascinated by the idea of the North American Indian. The association might become so strong that the world will automatically associate Native literature with topics such as oppression and alcoholism before even reading the piece. And in many ways I think this association already exists. I am not implying that writers should avoid or suppress the truth, but I do think that writers should be encouraged to write about a number of truths. Truths that also focus on positive aspects of community. ‘Dwelling’ on the negative does not allow one to move forward and it prevents one from introducing the world to other sources of knowledge- sources that could establish a better understanding between different cultural groups.

What a great story! It’s a quick read or at least that is what it seemed like. Everything just flowed- the figurative language, the great metaphors, the imagery, the dialogue. I’m sure the story could have a number of meanings; it depends on the reader.

In the story, Jonathan, a four-year old boy, asks his mom (Helen) to play a game, I’m not sure what to make out of this game. Perhaps it signifies a longing for a new life, a new beginning, or a change. Kids know a lot more than we think they know and I believe they rely more on feelings (internal senses) than knowledge, which is a beautiful thing. It seems that in our adult life we lose those internal senses and learn to rely on logic and knowledge to guide us instead. Feelings become ‘childish’ and we are told to ‘grow up’. But when we lose the child in us we become lost and superficial, at least in my opinion, (I hope that makes sense). The way I see it- never be afraid to feel. Now back to the story: Jonathan’s father lives in San Francisco where I think he works or is in prison (it is never explained in the story why the father is in San Francisco, one can only make a guess based on the information given by the author). Either way, Jonathan is trying to fill a void and perhaps the ‘birth game’ helps him cope.

Here is an excerpt from the story:

“About a year ago, Jonathan had crawled into bed with Helen, curled up against her stomach, and told her to push so he could be born. She pushed, and Jonathan was born morning after morning. At first, she was delighted with his interest in birth and his understanding of the process, which included, not without emotional difficulty, Caesarean section. Some days Jonathan would have to cut her open so he could escape. On the days when a section was called for, he would run his finger over her scar and ask if it still hurt. Later, the game became more elaborate with Helen having to walk the floor in an attempt to turn the baby so it could be born naturally.” (26)

Any thoughts?

“One of the best ways to understand a people is to know what makes them laugh. Laughter encompasses the limits of the soul. In humor life is redefined and accepted. Irony and satire provide much keener insights into a group’s collective psyche and values than do years of research.” (39)

I love that opening. What better way to get to know a person than to figure out what makes them laugh? One of the best indicators of one’s personality is sense of humor.

“The Indian people are exactly opposite of the popular stereotype. I sometimes wonder how anything is accomplished by Indians because of the apparent overemphasis on humor within the Indian world. Indians have found a humorous side of nearly every problem and the experiences of life have generally been so well defined through jokes and stories that they have become a thing of themselves.” (39)

Throughout this article the author makes reference to a number of jokes. Many of these jokes are metaphoric, witty, and convey a powerful message. Here are some examples:

“Rumor has it that Columbus began his journey with four ships. But one went over the edge so he arrived in the new world with only three. Another version states that Columbus didn’t know where he was going, didn’t know where he had been, and did it all on someone else’s money. And the white man has been following Columbus ever since.”(40)

“Another time when questioned by an anthropologist on what the Indians called America before the white man came, an Indian said simply, “Ours.” A young Indian was asked one day at a conference what a peace treaty was. He replied, “That’s when the white man wants a piece of your land.” (53)

And finally the closing statement, which summarizes the author’s message (I was going to provide my own summary, but lets get serious my summary does not do the author justice):

“Whether Indian jokes will eventually come to have more significance than that, I cannot speculate. Humor, all Indians will agree, is the cement by which the coming Indian movement is held together. When a people can laugh at themselves and laugh at other and hold all aspects of life together without letting anybody drive them to extremes, then it seems to me that that people can survive.” (53)

Check them out!
Music videos are on the site or you can find them on youtube.com

Heres is the site link:

www.warparty.ca

Here are excerpts from the article worth noting:

“Each of the ladies knew when his jail term was over he would come back. If he came back feeling reviled by the women of the village, his problems with women would only grow worse. If, in contrast, they demonstrated their forgiveness, their support and their waiting welcome, the opposite result might occur. In their view, while jail sentences might on occasion be necessary for the protection of all, the person who has to pay that price should not be cut off from community affection and support. To do so would only put the  community further at risk.” (74)

“Eye contact, a perennial favourite as a marker of the perils associated with cross-cultural encounters, is an ever popular topic. A Crown attorney’s book on the cultural attribute of Aboriginal clients garners praise, particularly for the description of Aboriginal men’s failure to look judges in the eye is a mark of respect rather than an admission of guilt.” (57)

“The question of eye contact surfaces once again, and Chief Justice Lilles, relying on Ross, notes the justice system often unnecessarily criminalizes and labels young Aboriginal people because of the assumption (based on their alleged tendency not to make eye contact) they are unreliable, remorseless, and uncooperative.” (75)

“The underlying philosophy in Aboriginal societies dealing with crime was the resolution of disputes, the healing of wounds and the restoration of social harmony. It might mean an expression of regret for the injury done by the offender or by members of the offender’s clan. It might be the presentation of gifts or payment of some kind. It might even mean the forfeiture of the offender’s life. But the matter was considered finished once the offence was recognized and dealt with my the offender and the offended. Atonement and the restoration of harmony were the goals- not punishment.” (76)

“The community’s response was to break the cycle of abuse through a  healing circle in which both victims and the offenders would come forward for treatment and rehabilitation… Chief Justice Lilles accepted the community alternative, as does Rupert Ross, on the basis that community disposition can be ‘hard time’ and even more difficult for the offender than a term of imprisonment. As he elaborates:                                                                                             

In this case I heard evidence about the humiliation which accompanies disclosure of an offence like this in a community the size of Teslin. ‘First one  must deal with the shock and then the dismay on your neighbors’ faces. One must live with the daily humiliation, and at the same time seek forgiveness not just from the victims, but from the community as a whole.’ For in a Native culture, a real harm has been done to everyone. A community disposition continues that humiliation, at least until full forgiveness has been achieved.” (77)

“Although women of color, like Aboriginal women, have consistently named patriarchal violence within the context of racism and the histories of colonialism and imperialism, the second part of the message is unlikely to be heard as strongly as the first.” (84)

“While cultural considerations may be intended to promote sensitivity, dominant groups too readily adopt the cultural differences approach, relieved not to have to confront the realities of racism and sexism. The challenge is, therefore, how to reduce these massive inequalities in communication so that Aboriginal women and women of colour can speak as well as be heard as they intended, without risking further marginalization. Cross-cultural sensitivity training will be of little use unless it is pursued in the context of the greater empowerment of the subordinate group… More important, this cross cultural training is pursued alongside of self-determination and the creation of a separate Aboriginal justice system.” (85-86)

After reading this article I wanted to share a  couple of things with the rest of you. Not sure if any of you had a chance to read it. There are many valuable points that the author makes.  I will provide a summary of some of the issues addressed.

Under the gaze of White society, a society engaged in drafting a constitution without recognition of Aboriginal self-determination, every legal issue is heard in the context of a denial of Aboriginal sovereignty. Minorities are invited to keep their culture but enjoy no greater access to power and resources. So how does an Aboriginal man or woman trust a criminal justice system that is foreign (colonial) and based on a set values that are not a part of their ideology? Same question can apply to development programs designed by the West that are meant to tackle sexual violence within Aboriginal communities.

Under the Canadian justice system Aboriginal woman face many obstacles in regards to violence and sexual violence cases. For instance, when alcohol is added to a sexual violence case, it acts as a more significant factor for an Aboriginal male than for a White male. For the Aborigninal male who is accused of rape, alcohol can be seen as a mitigation factor, as a root cause of violence against women. For the Aboriginal female, however, intoxication becomes a form of victim-daming, meaning it works against her: she was drunk so she exaggerated the violence, since she was drunk the way she was acting did not allow the male to realize that she was not consenting etc. Aboriginal women are also more subject to being imprisoned as a result of their responses to being abused. When alternatives to incarceration are discussed women offenders are rarely considered, where as male offenders are. Often healing and culturally appropriate sentencing is applied to male offenders and Aboriginal women are overlooked.

Many Aboriginal women that appear before the commission within their community feel isolated and accused of disloylaty to their Nation whenever they speak out against violence. When Aboriginal women speak out they are often seen as traitors and also risk not being offered the right legal assistance (as assistance is coming from the Canadian  legal system). As a result, women are  forced to choose between continued violence or double victimization and the harsh reality of being without home or community. When victims are foced to leave their homes and communities they are victimized again by the legal system. The logical approach should be to take  the offenders out of the community, not the victims.