Children still falling through cracks of jurisdiction

A study recently released by the Jordan Principle’s working group underscores the need for the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal to take a strong stand against the federal government for the less-than-adequate care it provides status First Nations children.

The decision by the tribunal in the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada and the Assembly of First Nations v. Attorney General of Canada is expected by mid-April.

But until then, First Nations children continue to lose out.

“The report is very clear that even right now there are still children falling through the gaps, that aren’t getting the service,” said Assembly of First Nations National Chief Perry Bellegarde.

The AFN was one of four organizations that worked with researchers from three universities to author the report. It comprises two studies that reviewed more than 300 Jordan’s Principle-related documents that indicated how the federal government dealt with First Nations children on reserve.

And despite the House of Commons unanimous adoption of Jordan’s Principle in 2007, the “jurisdictional wrangling” continues, said Bellegarde.

Jordan’s Principle states that in cases where jurisdictional responsibility is unclear, the level of government initially approached for the service needs to cover the cost. Payment issues between the levels of government are to be dealt with later.

The study indicates that children are still being neglected in all areas of care – social, educational, and health – as provincial departments and the federal government argue over jurisdiction and which level of government will cover the cost of services.

“The motivation for this policy work comes from the real stories of First Nations children, the injustices they have faced, and the extraordinary courage that they, their families, and their communities have displayed in response,” reads the report.

One of the issues with Jordan’s Principle, said Cindy Blackstock, executive director with First Nations Family and Caring Society, is the narrow scope the federal government has adopted in its implementation, and is one question (an upcoming) Canadian Human Rights Tribunal’s decision will address.

The CHRT will also rule on whether the federal government’s provision of First Nations child and family services is discriminatory.

“The real test is, if the child in question were to be a non-Aboriginal child, if he or she were to get the service, the First Nation’s child should get it as well,” said Blackstock.

The CHRT will outline remedies on both issues.

“The bonus of the decision is it will put an end, hopefully, to this delaying by the federal government of doing the right thing. To me it’s unconscionable the situation they’ve left these kids inÖ. I don’t think we can rely at all on the federal government on its own terms to do the right thing, so that’s why this order is really important because it would legally force the federal government to do the right thing for these kids,” said Blackstock.

There was nothing in the latest study that surprised Blackstock.

“It reaffirmed what we already knew which was that contrary to government belief there are kids being left behind because the federal government’s failure to implement Jordan’s Principle all over the country,” she said.

Both Blackstock and Bellegarde insist that it is important that First Nations play a role in establishing a system that sees children put first by the federal government and provinces.

“It’s our children that are in the provincial care system,” said Bellegarde, noting that there are more First Nations children in care now than at the height of the residential school system.

“We need to be involved.”