Reading 1

Indigenous Parenting and Childrearing Muir et al.
, 2018
Indigenous Parenting and Childrearing
Nicole M. Muir, Yvonne Bohr, Matthew Shepherd, Gwen Healey and Donald Warne
in M. H. Bornstein (Ed.). Handbook of parenting (3rd ed.). Routledge
1
Indigenous Parenting and Childrearing Muir et al., 2018
INTRODUCTION
Parenting and childrearing are central to all cultures due to their essential role in
the physical, cognitive, and emotional development of the next generation. Much progress
has been made in recent years in the documentation and study of parenting across cultures
(Bornstein, 1991, 2012, 2015). However, there is scant information available on
Indigenous parenting and child development, despite the fact that close to 370 million
Indigenous people occupy 20% of the planet’s territory and represent as many as 5,000
different cultural groups across all continents (United Nations, 2013). We use the term
Indigenous to represent all international individuals and communities related to, and/or
who have continuity historically with, the First Peoples in Canada, the United States, the
Americas, Pacific Islands, New Zealand, Australia, Asia, and Africa and those who
preceded colonizing populations (Allan and Smylie, 2015). It is important to consider that
Indigenous parenting, while affected by universal historical features, is subject to both
intracultural and intercultural differences, depending on, among other things, the
Indigenous cultural group or assimilation policies of governments.
The number of Indigenous families is increasing in many regions of the world, yet
the study of parenting and child development in these communities has not received much
attention, or methodical study, and often appears to be based on retrospective narratives
and anthropological observations (Biggs, 1998; Cheah and Chirkov, 2011; Dalla and
Gamble, 1997; Lefley, 1976; Little Soldier, 1985). This lack of attention belies that fact
that Indigenous parenting is a topic riddled with contradictions and controversy.
Indigenous cultures greatly value children; for example, in Anishnawbe belief systems
2
children are “gifts from the Creator,” while at the same time, children in Indigenous
communities face inordinate challenges when compared with their non-Indigenous peers
because of colonization. Indeed, Canadian Indigenous children suffer disproportionally
from health problems, such as obesity, diabetes, and Fetal Alcohol disorders, as well as
mental health problems including suicide (Public Health Agency of Canada, 2013). Māori
children in New Zealand (NZ) are also overrepresented in an array of negative education,
health and well-being statistics (Ministry of Social Development, 2010). Māori youth
experience worse health, and well-being outcomes than Pākehā (NZ European) young
people (Crengle et al., 2013; Helu, Robinson, Grant, Herd, and Denny, 2009; Ministry of
Social Development, 2010). For example, Māori youth have higher obesity rates, report
greater mental health concerns and substance use, reduced access to health services,
experience greater exposure to violence, and are more likely to leave secondary school with
lower educational qualifications than their non-Māori counterparts (Crengle et al., 2013;
Helu et al., 2008, Ministry of Social Development, 2010).
The health problems of Indigenous young people are primarily attributable to sub-
standard conditions for housing and basic municipal infrastructure, forced assimilation and
colonization, and historical and contemporary policies that further injustices of the past.
Yet Indigenous communities are often portrayed as showing maladaptive and neglectful
parenting practices that provide insufficient support for positive child development. These
portrayals are largely based on the disproportionate number of Indigenous children who
are apprehended by child protection systems in North America and New Zealand
(Cochrane, 1992; Harris et al., 2007; Litwin, Bohr, and Muir, under review; Office of
Children’s Commissioner, 2015; Pauktuutit, 2012; Trocmé, Knoke and Blackwell, 2004).
3
Negative perceptions of Indigenous people have likely been exacerbated by the fact that
little attention has typically been paid to historical context. Similarly, researchers have
shown negligible interest in culturally sanctioned ethnotheories of Indigenous childrearing,
the cultural strengths that beget parental ethnotheories, and these strengths’ effects on
resilience. Norms that are used to assess Indigenous parenting are undeniably still grounded
in mainstream Western parenting styles, a bias that needs to be corrected before quality of
parenting can be studied in an objective manner across Indigenous cultures (Litwin, Bohr,
and Muir, under review).
Many Indigenous communities across the globe are challenged by higher than
average social and economic adversities. Socioeconomic contextual factors, such as
education level and employment opportunities, are known to affect child development but
are not typically included in Western childhood development norms (Simard and Blight,
2011). Socioeconomic adversities have been attributed to intrusions and injustices brought
about by colonization, cultural genocide in many forms, and the ensuing collective trauma
that continues to have intergenerational repercussions (Evans-Campbell, 2008; Muir and
Bohr, 2014; Trocmé et al., 2004; United Nations, 2013). Indigenous family life and
parenting resources are profoundly affected by historical trauma. Forced parent-child
separations in Australia and North America, for example, had a devastating effect on
attachment relationships and the transmission of parenting in successive generations,
resulting in a transgenerational rupture in traditional Indigenous cultural knowledge and
childrearing patterns (Cheah and Chirkov, 2011; Ing, 1991). Similarly, in New Zealand,
even though the Treaty of Waitangi had been established between the crown and the
majority of Māori in 1840 (which guaranteed Māori sovereignty of New Zealand), the
4
following decades from 1840 onwards were a testimony to unbridled hegemony by the
crown as there was a large percentage of land transfer from Māori ownership to crown
ownership (Orange, 2015). Much of this land transfer occurred through the use of newly
created laws enforced by the might and overwhelming numbers of British colonial soldiers.
Māori lost connection to their land, language, culture and the support of their tribe (Walker,
1990). Nonetheless, there is much resilience to be found in the practices and experience of
Indigenous families and communities.
This chapter is intended as an introduction to Indigenous parenting values,
practices, and challenges. We aim to contextualize Indigenous parenting customs by 1)
discussing the historical trauma context which affects many diverse Indigenous cultures
worldwide whose parenting practices have been, and continue to be, affected by
colonization and the ensuing traumatization of entire communities; 2) past and current
discriminatory government policies and practices that shaped (and continue to shape) the
relationships between Indigenous parents and their children; and 3) and most importantly,
Indigenous parenting beliefs, values, and practices, or ethnotheories that are shared by
diverse communities and that are understood to build resiliency in children.
When possible, we present examples of unique issues and practices for specific
Indigenous Nations from Canada, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and
Scandinavia. Finally, we will offer recommendations for future research using
decolonizing Indigenous research methodologies.
HISTORICAL CONTEXT: THE TRAUMA OF SYSTEMATIC FAMILY
SEPARATION AND PURPOSEFUL ANNIHILATION OF CULTURE
5
Historical trauma, defined as the effects of purposeful injurious events that were
experienced by many Indigenous communities in the past, continues to cause high levels
of distress and grieving for groups that were victimized. Such events were deliberately
inflicted over time by non-Indigenous people and have been recently recognized as a form
of genocide (Evans-Campbell, 2008; Warne and Lajimodiere, 2015). Historical trauma
continues to interact with current stressors, cumulatively affecting the well being of
Indigenous people over generations (Evans-Campbell, 2008). In New Zealand for example,
the Māori people had significant expanses of land taken from them and lost a large portion
of their population due to contagious diseases throughout the mid to late 1800s (Ellison-
Loschmann and Pearce, 2006). Indigenous people reflect on the losses linked to
colonialism, assigning them feelings of bereavement and anger (Whitbeck, Adams, Hoyt,
and Chen, 2004). Other common reactions to historical trauma include depression, drug
and alcohol use, identifying with ancestors’ pain, somatic symptoms, anxiety, and chronic
grief (Brave Heart-Jordan, 1995). The residential school experience in particular represents
a salient example of historical trauma that had direct repercussions for parenting over many
generations. Residential Schools played a defining, highly problematic, and insidious role
in shaping many aspects of modern day Indigenous parenting.
Residential schools were implemented by governments in Canada, Australia (but
not New Zealand), and the United States (where they were called boarding schools) as a
system of compulsory assimilation (Smith, Varcoe, and Edwards, 2005; Warne and
Lajimodiere, 2015). In Canada, for example, it is estimated that at least 150,000 First
Nations, Métis and Inuit children attended residential schools, between the mid-1800s to
1996, when the last school was closed (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
6
Canada [AANDC], 2010; Health Canada, 2012; Pauktuuti, 2012). Attendance at these
schools required a forced separation of children and adolescents from their families during
prime developmental periods. These schools were designed to assimilate Indigenous
children to mainstream European ideologies and social norms. Children were required to
speak English, were prohibited from speaking their native languages, and were frequently
subjected to abusive discipline (King, 2006). Students were not allowed to practice any
form of their cultural or spiritual traditions and beliefs (Smith et al., 2005; King, 2006;
AANDC, 2010). The main focus of residential schools was the assimilation of Indigenous
children by means of breaking the link to their culture (Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada, 2015a). Residential schools also dismantled the relationship
between Indigenous children and their parents, which disrupted the transmission of
culturally based parenting skills (Bombay, Matheson, and Anisman, 2011; Warne and
Lajimodiere, 2015). Survivors of residential schools often found it difficult to become
loving parents because of their exposure to the strict institutionalized discipline and many
forms of abuse that they had experienced in residential schools (Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada, 2015a) and the damage to a positive parenting experience and the
attachment relationship (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015b).
Caregivers who had attended residential schools have reported feeling inadequate and
overwhelmed when parenting their own children (Brave Heart and DeBruyn, 1998).
Furthermore, the children of residential school survivors often reported traumatic
childhoods that included abuse. When these children became parents themselves, they
described being confused about how to rear their children in a healthy way (Brave Heart-
Jordan, 1995).
7
In Cree and Metis cultures, it is taught that “…Female Elders, also known as
Grandmothers, carry the childrearing bundle for the people” (Dorion, 2010, p.7).
Grandmothers are seen as the holders of parenting and child development teachings and
are held in high esteem by their communities (Fasoli and Johns, 2007). The term
Grandmother in Anishnawbe communities can denote both a related family member and
an unrelated family member who is instead an older Indigenous woman who carries
childrearing teachings, and in this case, “Grandmother” is capitalized. In the words of an
Anishnawbe Grandmother:
… a lot of the problems started with Indigenous history and a lot of that stuff that
went on, especially the residential schools. When you think of a whole town… and
you take all the children or 80% of the children away and you just leave the adults...
[That is] a big impact on everyone, on all the grandparents, mothers, fathers,
aunties, uncles, cousins. You just have all these adults with no children there. And
some of them never even know what happened to their children. They never came
home. They just, one day were taken… You [cannot] even begin to imagine the
impact it has on the future generations which is probably my mother and her
mother. ... [that is] where that big gap comes in, that parenting, the skills and the
skills that they would have learned, were not passed on, … and because there was
always that sense of chaos and that loss and trauma of all that never got to a point
where it can heal and re-begin. (Grandmother Dorothy, as cited in Muir, Litwin and
Bohr, unpublished manuscript).
The damage to culturally sanctioned parenting skills that is reported in many
narrative accounts is likely based in the absence of traditional role models, as future parents
8
were taken from their families. In addition, mental health problems among survivors
affected parenting behaviors, and family belief systems and capacity, resulting in
dysfunctional parent-child relationships (Bombay, Matheson, and Anisman, 2009; Dorion,
2010). In addition, childhood trauma may have induced changes to bio-physiological
systems, potentially affecting parents’ ability to cope with stressors (McGowan et al.,
2009). When individuals live through traumatic experiences as children, they are often
more vulnerable to experiencing trauma in adulthood (Bombay, Matheson, and Anisman,
2014; Horwitz, Widom, McLaughlin, and White, 2001). Trauma in a family context in turn
can significantly affect parenting, often resulting in the replication of a traumatic childhood
environment (Levendosky and Graham-Bermann, 2000; Roberts et al., 2004). Children of
residential school survivors report experiencing more childhood trauma than Indigenous
children whose caregivers did not attend Residential schools (Bombay et al., 2011). As a
result of not having traditional parental role models, and because of the abuse that occurred
in residential Schools, it is possible that many survivors have lost the ability to engage in
nurturing social interactions with children that promote healthy connections (Wesley-
Esquimaux and Smolewski, 2004). In Inuit communities in Canada, a series of events
including a widespread Tuberculosis outbreak, and the implementation of forced
settlement and residential school attendance policies, caused profound changes in the
family life of Northern communities due to family separation and displacement, language
suppression, disrupted attachments, and loss of lands and self-determinism (McShane,
Hastings, Smylie, Prince, and The Tungasuvvingat Inuit Resource Centre, 2009; Healey,
2016). Clearly, the disruption of parent-child attachment, subsequent lack of experience
with healthy attachment relationships, and lack of models for the latter would also have
9
significant repercussions for family interactions and development. The impact of the
systematically inhumane treatment of Indigenous families, which affected entire
generations of parents and now grandparents, is likely still evident today in the parenting
practices of Indigenous families (Litwin et al., under review; Smith et al., 2005).
PAST AND CURRENT DISCRIMINATORY GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND
PRACTICES
Over the past two centuries, governments have made it a goal to eradicate
Indigenous culture and thought, and they have succeeded as demonstrated by the negative
self-image and dissociation from cultural identity shown by generations of Indigenous
individuals and families (King, 2006; Smith et al., 2005). As stated by a Canadian victim
of these practices: “When I was younger I used to talk about how my family had lost that
culture, but the reality is that my identity was stolen, it didn’t just come spontaneously from
my family. That stuff was instilled, and it’s been instilled in many Aboriginal people in
Canada. It was a systematic attempt to whitewash Aboriginal families. It’s really sad” (Best
Start Resource Centre, 2012, pg. 18). The ensuing effects of these traumas, including their
intergenerational transmission, resulting in mental health and substance abuse sequelae
have been extensively discussed and studied (AANDC, 2010).
In Canada, where 4.3% of the population are Indigenous, depending on the province
and the year, between 40% and 80% of children in the child welfare system are of
Indigenous descent (StatsCan, 2011; Trocmé et al., 2004). In New Zealand, Māori make
up approximately 15% of the general population, and yet in 2015, 58% of children and
youth were recorded as being in government care (Office of Children’s Commissioner,
2015). The view that Indigenous children are disproportionately neglected by their
10
caregivers and kin is particularly disturbing as these negative views pertain to a culture in
which offspring are highly valued, and entire communities are expected to be actively
involved in childrearing (Pauktuutit, 2012; Wilson, 2016). A greater attention to historical
trauma in understanding presumed neglect could change the focus from individual blame
of parents and families to acknowledging how colonialism continues to impact Indigenous
peoples’ lives. As well, a Western focus on the reputed dysfunction of individual nuclear
families, without acknowledging or addressing the contextual social issues in Indigenous
communities, “perpetuates notions of pathology” (Coleman, Unrau, and Manyfingers,
2001, p. 66). It is very likely that mainstream parenting research has significantly
contributed to viewing Indigenous childrearing practices through a deficit lens (Pooyak
and Gomez, 2009).
However, it would be a mistake to emphasize historical injustices exclusively as
the only causal factors for the current problems that Indigenous people face. Indeed,
contemporary colonial practices further perpetuate the victimization of Indigenous people,
creating challenging conditions for optimal parenting. It is important to consider whether
one is “…dealing with actual historical issues or more proximate grief and trauma from the
daily lives of often economically disadvantaged people who live with constant overt and
institutionalized discrimination, severe health issues, and high mortality rates. The current
conditions may be attributed to historical causes, however, the origins of the symptoms
may be contemporary experiences” (Whitbeck, Adams, Hoyt, and Chen, 2004, p.119).
Grandmother Dorothy noted that:
… The world is so different for us here and the times, I mean, in that [it is] difficult
to practice [our culture] especially if [you are] engaging with addictions or if you
11
[do not] know your culture or if [you are] just kind of struggling with poverty. You
know those things are hard to practice because [you are] so engaged in trying to
survive. … I think a lot of our energies get wasted on just being, just surviving in a
world [that is] not really nice to us (as cited in Muir, Litwin and Bohr, unpublished
manuscript).
There are many examples of contemporary government policies that have
significant repercussions for Indigenous parenting. In Canada, the federal government
changed the Indian Act in the early 1950s as it began to become clear that Residential
schools were failures, and the federal government began to close them (Union of B.C.
Indian Chiefs, 2002). After this change, the federal government began to pay the provinces
to provide child welfare services to Indigenous people and Indigenous children began to
increasingly move from residential schools into the child welfare system (Union of B.C.
Indian Chiefs, 2002). In British Columbia, a Ministry of Human Resources staff termed
this process “the Sixties Scoop”, as social workers employed by the province would, “quite
literally, scoop children from the reserves on the slightest pretext” (Johnson, 2002, p. 23).
Johnson (2002) speculated that this was done for two reasons: The social workers thought
they were saving these children from poverty, unsanitary conditions, and malnutrition, but
it is more likely that this was simply a new form of colonization. From the 1960s to the
1980s, thousands of Indigenous children (16,000 in Ontario, Canada alone) were taken
from their families and adopted into mostly non-Indigenous families in Canada or sent to
the United States and the United Kingdom, without parental consent (Russell, 2016).
Present-day foster care systems in some ways took over from the residential school system.
For example, Blackstock (2003) noted that the number of Indigenous children in child
12
welfare today has surpassed the numbers boarded at the height of the residential school
system. As of 2011 in Canada, Indigenous children accounted for 7% of all Canadian
children, yet 14,000 were in foster care, representing 48% of all Canadian foster children
(Turner, 2016).
For the Inuit, in the first 60 years of the twentieth century, attempts by outsiders to
teach Inuit children reading, writing, and arithmetic were scattered and inconsistent
(McGregor, 2010). Following the Second World War, this began to change as informal
networks of education were replaced by a new government program which aimed to make
Inuit into full Canadian “citizens” (Qikiqtani Inuit Association, QIA, 2010). In 1951, the
first government-regulated school for Inuit was opened in Chesterfield Inlet (Pauktuutit,
2007). For some communities, up to three generations of Inuit children were sent away
from their families to attend day schools in the larger communities (Pauktuutit, 2007).
Some children were sent much farther away than the nearest settlement, to residential
schools in other provinces and territories. Others were sent to live with Qallunaat families
in southern cities, such as Ottawa, Edmonton and Halifax. Qallunaat is the Inuktitut word
that is commonly used for ‘white person’ or ‘non-Inuk’. This caused great anguish for both
the parents and the children (Pauktuutit, 2007; QIA, 2010). Residential schools for Inuit
continued to open into the 1960s and by 1963, 3,997 Inuit children were attending these
schools (King, 2006). In June 1964, 75% of 6 to15 year old Inuit children and youth were
enrolled in the schools (King, 2006). These students are the parents, grandparents, uncles,
and aunts of today.
In Canada, for children and youth who live on reserves, living conditions, such as
access to adequate, uncrowded housing and clean safe drinking water, are frequently
13
subpar because of treaty agreements that are not honoured which require the federal
government to provide adequate funding for such infrastructure. Reserves are parcels of
land, which have been set aside by the Queen for an Indigenous Band’s use (Abbot, 2003).
In actuality, reserves, which are federally controlled under the Indian Act, “had a
devastating impact on Indigenous ways of knowing” (Allan and Smylie, 2015, p. 10) as
the Indian Act controlled most of the activities on reserve (for example, in the past,
Indigenous people were not allowed to leave the reserve without asking permission from
the government appointed Non-Indigenous Indian agent). Reserves are often isolated and
because of this isolation, have few services (such as doctors or grocery stores) that
Indigenous people can access. There are, for example, no high schools on many northern
Ontario reserves in Canada, and often the schools that do exist are in disrepair. To obtain
a high school education, many youth must travel hundreds of kilometres to a larger urban
centre and board with non-Indigenous families (Blackstock, 2008; Chown Oved, 2015).
Separation of Indigenous parents from their children, which began with residential schools
continues today, with the disregard for treaty obligations at the federal government level
and systems-level policies that continue to perpetuate the structural violence of the past.
Contemporary government policies in the United States that have had a detrimental
impact on children and families is the long-standing and significant underfunding of health
and social programs for American Indians and Alaska Natives through the Indian Health
Service and the Bureau of Indian Affairs. The tribal nations in the U. S. signed hundreds
of treaties with the federal government in which the tribes exchanged land and natural
resources for various social services, including housing, education, and healthcare.
Therefore, the tribal nations have a legal right to health and social services in the U. S.
14
Unfortunately, the dearth of resources that have been allocated to implement health and
social services has led to decreased access to prenatal care, maternal and child health,
family services, and educational programs. These under-resourced programs, combined
with poverty and discrimination, are at the root of the many of the parenting and family
supports disparities in the Indigenous population (see Warne and Frizzell, 2014).
Much available research has examined Indigenous families primarily through a
deficit lens by focusing on what researchers perceive to be Indigenous parents’
incompetent, non-mainstream parenting that has been deemed inferior to practices based
on Western ideas of family. Such research often fails to acknowledge systemic injustices
or highlight strengths in Indigenous parenting (Bertsch and Bidgood, 2010; Red Horse,
1997). Cultural chauvinism, or the perception that only the values of the dominant culture
reflect human nature, may play a role in these negative depictions (The Royal Commission
on Indigenous Peoples, 1996). There has been virtually no understanding or recognition
that Indigenous people have their own epistemology about how they understand
themselves, others, and the world in which they live. Many facets of Indigenous parenting
and child development, such as the role of extended family and community in childrearing,
child autonomy and exploration of their environment and holistic perspectives which
encompass spiritual, mental, emotional and physical well-being of the child, are not
adequately addressed in mainstream parenting and child development research (Sarche and
Whitesell, 2012). Using non-Indigenous (i.e., Western, Caucasian, middle class family-
focused) theoretical frameworks with Indigenous families, frameworks that are not
adequately contextualized in a comprehensive understanding of the intergenerational basis
for disrupted Indigenous parenting, likely provides an incomplete and inexact assessment
15
of Indigenous parenting and child development and insufficiently highlights the strengths
of Indigenous communities (Gerlach, 2008; Simard and Blight, 2011). Figure 1 displays a
more balanced perspective on disrupted Indigenous parenting. Figure 1 provides a visual
summary of intergenerational risk factors (Warne and Lajimodiere, 2015).
Figure 1. Adapted with permission from Warne and Lajimodiere, 2015
In the following section, we provide a glimpse into some features of resilient
Indigenous parenting that merit research attention and should be incorporated into
examinations of Indigenous parenting and child development. These parenting practices
include: continued differences between Indigenous parenting practices from that of
Western parenting and differences between Nations; attachment and parental sensitivity;
competency, autonomy and discipline; cultural values and the transmission of these values;
and who holds and teaches this knowledge. Then, specific Indigenous childrearing features
16
will be addressed which include: extended family and community, spirit, ceremonies, the
bond with parents, disciplining/setting boundaries, intergenerational and community
transmission, and the role of fathers. Finally, current day obstacles to Indigenous parenting
will be examined.
ETHNOTHEORIES THAT INFORM INDIGENOUS PARENTING AND CHILD
REARING: CONTENT AND TRANSMISSION
There have been significant interference, disruption, and, in effect, efforts to
eradicate the practice and transmission of culturally specific childrearing in Indigenous
communities worldwide. It is thus remarkable that, although many traditions have
vanished, some childrearing traditions live and thrive in modern Indigenous families (Javo,
Alapack, Heyerdahl, and Ronning, 2003; Muir and Bohr, 2014). Ryan (2011) showed that
Australian Indigenous parents from both urban and remote communities retained unique
traditional parenting practices pertaining to sensitivity towards their child’s needs and the
promotion of emotional self-regulation, self-expression, and competence. In Canada,
Cheah and Chirkov (2008) showed that Indigenous mothers differed from their Euro-
Canadian counterparts in their focus on family, respect for Elders, and the maintenance of
cultural values. Similarly, van de Sande and Menzies’ (2003) evaluation of Anishnawbe
parenting programs proposed that there continues to be significant distinctiveness in the
principles for rearing Anishnawbe children such as higher Elder and extended family
involvement in spite of decades of influence by mainstream culture. For the Māori, there
is more involvement of extended family members and grandparents in the rearing young
children when compared to NZ European families, which can assist with the
intergenerational transmission of parenting knowledge (Ritchie, 2017). Eni and Phillips-
17
Beck (2013) noted that despite colonialism and cultural and geographic marginalization,
tradition and essential family values have endured in the ways that Indigenous parents rear
their children. A Norwegian team studying Sami parenting norms also identified
differences between these parents’ customs and those of the dominant Norwegian culture,
even after years of assimilation (Javo, Ronning, and Heyerdahl’s, 2004). Simard and Blight
(2011) noted the importance of cultural identity formation, including an attachment to
cultural values and ancestral territories or lands, an attachment that is typically conveyed
to Indigenous children through language and teaching traditional practices. These authors
highlight the importance of Indigenous childrearing goals that pre-date colonialism for
health promotion for Indigenous peoples, and contextualize them in the cultural losses such
as loss of lands and languages attributed to colonialism.
One Meta-culture, Many Variations
There is no such thing as one Indigenous culture, no universal “Aboriginal
paradigm” (Loppie, 2007) but rather, each Indigenous culture reflects the lands and waters
to which they are connected. In Canada for example, Indigenous people who belong to up
to 617 First Nations or bands and 80 Nations, and live in over 1000 settlement
communities, make up about 4.3% of the Canadian population (Statistics Canada, 2011).
In the United States, there are over 560 federally recognized tribes located in 35 states.
Distinct Nations sport diverse cultures and languages, beliefs and practices, and many
differences can also be found between Indigenous peoples in urban locations and on
reserves (Cheah and Sheperd, 2011). Residing on different continents like the Anishnawbe
in eastern Canada or the Maori in New Zealand, in diverse countries, and belonging to
distinct communities and Nations, Indigenous people do not all raise children in the same
18
way. Still, some commonalities are evident in the childrearing practices of Indigenous
cultures (Neckoway, 2011). Loppie (2007) suggested that, despite geographical, language
and social structure differences, shared Indigenous parenting values exist that are
philosophically different from European North American cultural norms. For example,
historically, Indigenous communities in North America appear to have been more
egalitarian than European Americans, with shared responsibility for the entire
community’s wellness (Cheah and Chirkov, 2008). In the following section, we describe
some of these practices in terms of both Content (the principles and practices involved)
and Transmission (how practices are transmitted).
Attachment and Parental Sensitivity
A secure attachment relationship with a responsive, reliable caregiver, as first
described by Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Wall (1978), is considered by many to be the
cornerstone of healthy social emotional development in children. However, the methods
used to assess the quality of attachment, and the parental behaviors that allegedly foster a
good attachment, have been criticized for not adequately capturing cultural variations of
attachment practices, for example in Indigenous cultures. Carriere and Richardson (2009)
proposed that in cultures in which dyadic caregiving relationships are not as central as
whole family and community-based caregiving the term “connectedness” may better
describe children’s attachment to a caregiving system (Atwool, 2006). For example, an
Australian study found that Indigenous children from the Central and Western regions were
often cared for by siblings (Ryan, 2011). Inuit attachment perspective is described by
Karetak as ‘the egg, the rock, and the human being’ (Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre
(QHRC), 2015). Attachments are developed and fostered through the Inuit’s collective
19
responsibility to teach children, develop their skills, and show them love. The child in this
environment will thrive and become a capable human being. The child who has been
mistreated and neglected displays ‘rock-like’ characteristics, hardened to the outside world
and unable to express emotions or develop relationships to others in a healthy way. The
child who has been over-indulged, spoiled and protected displays ‘egg-like’ characteristics,
unable to cope with challenging or distressing circumstances and cracking under pressure.
It is important to note that, in this worldview, rock-like and egg-like individuals can be
made into capable human beings, they do not have to stay that way, and that with love,
support, compassion, and the investment of time in developing an individual’s strengths,
an individual can change (QHRC, 2015).
An Australian study found that all members of Indigenous extended family circles
of caregivers were expected to respond to infants’ vocalizations and that letting a baby
become distressed and cry was considered by the family to be cruel and was frowned on
(Kruske, Belton, Wardaguga, and Narjic, 2012). More research is needed to better
understand the cultural strengths, and possible advantages, inherent in the anticipation and
prevention of infant distress, as contrasted with sensitive responding once a child is already
distressed, if indeed this practice is found to be characteristic of and adaptive in Indigenous
communities.
Child Competency and Non-Interference, and Use of Boundaries or Discipline
Much emphasis is placed on promoting child competency and skill development in
Indigenous cultures’ childrearing practices. This prevalent focus on child autonomy is
based on concepts of exploration of the environment and non-interference in all aspects of
an individual’s life which is expressed by many communities as a reluctance to give
20
instructions, correct, coerce, or persuade others (Neckoway, 2010). Corporal punishment
was not used traditionally with Indigenous children (Salmond, 1997) but was introduced
in residential schools (Benzies, 2014). Children are typically seen as competent, equal
contributors to their communities (Benzies, 2014). Indigenous children are commonly
respected as autonomous persons who belong to a collective and are encouraged to make
their own decisions when it comes to exploring their environment (McPherson and Rabb,
2001 as cited in Neckoway et al., 2007; Sheperd, 2008). For example both Inuit and Sami
families aimed to promote child independence through risk taking, as an essential building
block for hardship endurance and ultimately survival (QHRC, 2015). Australian
Indigenous research further supports the notion of unassisted risk taking; for example,
climbing trees and handling knives are seen as important steps toward competence and
autonomy (Kruske et al., 2012). Alaskan Yup’ik (MacDonald-Clark and Boffman, 1995)
and Sami children were also encouraged to engage in daily activities based on their own
internal rhythm. At the same time, Sami parents are expected to balance the push to
autonomy with much affectionate responsiveness to their children’s emotional needs (Javo
et al., 2003, 2004). The value of physical autonomy and risk-taking is seen across
Indigenous cultures in Australia, Norway and United States.
In line with the described childrearing goals, cultural variations exist, but common
Indigenous family values that pertain to disciplining children differ somewhat from those
of mainstream Western parenting (Muir and Bohr, 2014). American Indian informants in
Dionne and colleagues’ study (2009) in southern California specified that strict disciplining
was “very strong medicine” in contrast to the “good medicine” inherent in positive
attention, mutual play, and affection. Even when children display aggression, Indigenous
21
mothers responded with patience and teaching life lessons, values, and community rules.
Cheah and Sheperd (2011) found that Indigenous participants were less likely to insist their
aggressive child behave, or threaten negative consequences, than European Canadian
parents. Similarly, McShane et al. (2009) reported that, rather than disciplining, Inuit
parents made use of interpersonal games and benevolent teasing to support their children’s
emotion regulation during times of upset.
Anishnawbe people in Ontario, Canada also actively strive for physical, emotional,
mental, and spiritual competence in their children. Grandmother Dorothy emphasized the
importance of empowering a child, and guiding the child to make up own mind, to stand
by own decisions, and to manage own emotions. She emphasized that a sense of self is
obtained by “feeling safe in the home, knowing you are loved and cared for regardless of
circumstances”, and through “expressing emotions in a healthy fashion” (Muir, Litwin and
Bohr, unpublished manuscript). According to Dorothy, children should be supported
through difficult times, as support fosters respect for parents and other community
members, including Elders. Developing respect helps children to accept their
responsibilities and account for their actions. According to the Grandmothers in Muir and
colleagues’ study, Anishnawbe childrearing goals differ most dramatically from
mainstream Western parenting goals in that they emphasize the four holistic domains of
spiritual, mental, physical and emotional competence, which together make up the
traditional Medicine Wheel of the Anishnawbe and other Nations. Only when these four
domains are balanced in a child, is that child deemed healthy (Muir et al., unpublished
manuscript; Warne, 2005).
22
In the Inuit Inunnguiniq perspective, which describes ‘the making of a capable
human being’, there are 3 components to a child’s development: Inuusiq (life and health
matters), Pilimmaqsarniq (acquisition of skills through effort and practice), and Silativut
(responding to our lands and environment) (Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre, [QHRC]
2015). In Inuit communities, Elders describe childrearing in terms of teaching to the heart,
teaching children to be of sound moral character, to help others from a young age, and to
develop their strengths (QHRC, 2015). They say that when we teach to a child’s heart, the
head or mind will follow and children will learn to become capable human beings that are
able to take care of themselves and others, defend themselves from danger, and persevere
through difficult emotional, mental, and physical situations. Atuat Akittirq stated that
setting boundaries for children begins the moment they are able to pick up an object and
try to put it in their mouth. That is the time that we really begin to pay attention, to observe,
and to teach children respect for others and their property, and to lead by example (Karetak,
Tester, and Tagalik 2017).
Transmission of Cultural Values
Transmission of cultural values is an important aspect of childrearing in Indigenous
cultures. Transmission is accomplished through implicit and explicit instruction. There is
intergenerational and bidirectional transmission, and transmission through bonds with
parents, with grandparents, and with the community. Transmission of spirituality and
culture is carried out through ceremony, teachings, storytelling and example. For Inuit, the
following four Maligait (foundational Inuit societal laws) are woven into ancient stories
that have been passed down for generations and continued to be shared with children and
families today: 1) To respect all living creatures; 2) To maintain balance and harmony; 3)
23
Working for the common good; and 4) Continually planning and preparing for the future.
When this guidance is followed, relationships with others, and the lands and waters that
sustain humans, support the latter in the learning journey over the life course. Teachings of
culture involve not just the parents, or primary caregivers, but the extended family and
community (Muir and Bohr, 2015).
In Anishnawbe childrearing, according to Grandmother Dorothy (as cited in Muir
et. al., unpublished manuscript), values that are considered the most important to pass on
are those relating to the Seven Grandfather Teachings: wisdom, love, respect, bravery,
honesty, humility and truth. Respect is deemed to be “cyclical”: Respecting other people,
especially the elderly, leads to self-respect, which further enables respect from others,
which leads back to self-respect and integrity, and so on. Respect is often taught at
ceremonies, and helps the child to become a healthy and capable adult. Such teaching also
occurs with the Māori. One example of a value that is developed from within Māori society
is whānaungatanga. This is where Māori, through growing up in a whānau or working and
learning together, develop a sense of kinship. It is through this sense of learned
interdependency that obligations to one another and the wider whānau unit, tribe and the
environment develop (Biggs, 2012). In Māori culture, transmission of cultural values can
occur through learning the Māori language (te reo). There has been a renaissance in New
Zealand where pre-school Māori children have the opportunity to attend a kohanga reo
(early childhood centre) and learn te reo (Rau and Ritchie, 2011). Kohanga have become
central places where parents, grandparents, and caregivers of children meet and learn te reo
and tikanga (Māori culture) together. Adults who missed these learning opportunities when
24
they were children now have the chance to learn this important knowledge (Cooper, Arago-
Kemp, Wylie, and Hodgen, 2004).
The intergenerational transmission of cultural values is especially important for the
members of cultures that have been traumatized by malevolent external forces, most
notably colonialism. Cultural transmission in those groups may be more meaningful and
essential than for cultures that have not experienced colonialism. Research with urban
Indigenous women from Canada concluded that having a strong affiliation with the
Indigenous culture can act as a protective factor with regard to effects of trauma, and may
engender resilience (Litwin et al., under review). In that study, greater connection to culture
was associated with lower levels of stress, higher levels of perceived social support, and
increased positive parenting practices for participating mothers. Maternal cultural
affiliation was also strongly associated with more optimal childhood outcomes for
offspring.
Keepers of Childrearing Knowledge
Cultural knowledge about parenting, family wellness, and other aspects of
Indigenous family and community life have historically been held by Elders and passed on
orally to subsequent generations. An example of this is the Berry Fast in Anishnawbe
culture. In Muir et al.’s interviews, Kokomis Jacqui highlighted a ceremony, the Berry
Fast, which begins when a young woman experiences menarche and continues for an entire
year during which she does not eat any berries. Grandmother Jacqui commented that the
Berry Fast helps young girls to better understand the Seven Grandfathers Teachings. Jacqui
spoke of the feast that was prepared for her at the end of her Berry Fast and how the older
women, “…came and they cupped my face and looked in my eyes and told me that I would
25
always be “Obiday Anishnaabe Kwe kwee dow”. You will always be Anishnawbe Kwe
[Earth Woman]”. When Jacqui’s older sister explained this interaction to her, Jacqui
understood the immense gift the Elders and Grandmothers had given her: They were giving
Jacqui their own power and helping her understand the person she would always be. Here
the Grandmothers and Elders passed on their teachings through ceremony.
Indigenous people believe that traditional knowledge and oral histories about
children and families have retained their relevancy over many generations (Blackstock,
2007). Traditional knowledge is the culmination of the teachings of multiple generations
(Canadian Institutes of Health Research, 2010). Elders maintained their status as sources
of wisdom, pride, and inspiration in their communities even through colonization (Fasoli
and Johns, 2007). In Indigenous communities, the role of an Elder is both extensive and
highly respected (Mooradian, Cross, and Stutzky, 2006), and being held in high regard by
a community indicates the Elder’s authority. Highly respected Elders have spent a great
deal of time learning and disseminating traditional knowledge (Canadian Institutes of
Health Research, 2010). In Māori culture, Elders and parents would use oriori (chant) to
pass on traditional knowledge and oral histories to young children, such as where children
come from, where they are going, and traditional teachings (Mead and Mead, 2003) which
would guide them on the pathway of life (Penehira and Doherty, 2013).
The following features of Indigenous parenting are appear to be shared by many
communities, and are believed by some Elders to be central to childrearing.
Extended family and community. The importance of extended family and
community in Indigenous cultures cannot be over-emphasized. Indeed, many scholars have
highlighted the differences between Western cultures and Indigenous cultures, focusing on
26
the multi-layered versus dyadic human bonds that exist between children and their
caregiving system (Neckoway et al., 2007). In Anishnawbe communities, the concept of
family encompasses the nuclear family and the extended family, and also the treaty-linked
community, a Nationhood family (all Anishnawbe people, regardless of province or
country), a Clan family (deer or turtle clan, the spiritual aspect of family), and a cultural
family (linked to Anishnawbe ceremonial practices) (Simard and Blight, 2011). In Lakota
and other Northern Plains cultures, it was the responsibility of one generation to actively
participate in raising the next generation. Aunts and uncles in had just as much parental
authority and responsibility as the biological parents. In this way, the children grew up with
numerous mothers and fathers with significant social support as opposed to the nuclear
family framework introduced by colonizing cultures.
Indigenous children, be they from Australia, Navajo territory, Nunavut, or New
Zealand, are described as highly valued members of extended family networks, who are
provided with much attention and affection by whole communities, including siblings,
Elders, also known as Grandmothers and aunts, other allo-parents (for example, Koori
mothering women from Australia who are not biologically related to the child). Surrogate
parents have traditionally held well-defined roles in the rearing the youngest members of
their community (Atkinson and Swain, 1999; Hossain et al., 1999; Kruske et al., 2012;
Fuller-Thomson, 2005; Nelson and Allison, 2000). Māori children may be given to an
extended family member at birth or as an older child, and this custom is known as whangai
(Pitama, 1997). This process was one where the young child was seen as being highly
prized and valued and much would be given to this child. The child was not seen to be the
sole responsibility of two parents but of the whole hapu (tribe) (Pitama, 1997).
27
Spirit. Spirit is considered to reside in every Anishnawbe person. Spirit is perhaps
the most important concept to instil and nurture in a child. It gives children the strength
and direction necessary to cope with life. Spirit nurtures self-awareness and vice versa, and
children are believed to know their bodies and spirits right from birth. Kokomis Jacqui (in
Muir et al., unpublished manuscript) commented:
… [Children] will always be aware … where spirit lives, in your navel area…
Spirit is trying to tell us something and it’s our own spirit, soul spirit that is
doing that, creating that awareness within ourselves.
It is important for caregivers to help their children believe in themselves and help
them to understand that they are spirit and have spirit within themselves. Spirit can be
nurtured by allowing children to express themselves freely without interference from
adults. If a child is urged to express and listen to herself or himself, she or he will have the
tools to become an emotionally healthy adult. Not only does one have to nurture spirit, one
has to trust that the child can feel her own spirit. To achieve this, Anishnawbe parents:
…let [children] eat when they’re hungry because that’s their schedule.
[Children] know when they’re hungry. They know when they’re thirsty.
They’ll tell you. So sometimes, people force-feed their kids, ‘you finish all
your dinner or there’s no tv’. That’s kind of not a good thing to do because …
that child knows already its’ body, right from the time that it is born. [The
child] knows its body so well; [the child] knows its’ spirit so well that [child]
knows how to take care of [itself] (Grandmother Dorothy, in Muir et al.,
unpublished manuscript).
28
When Anishnawbe children join mainstream society (daycare, schools), their
“knowing” of their own spirits should ideally be continuously reinforced by external
authority figures. Instead, by inhibiting children from listening to their spirit, it is believed
that these outside influences often desensitize the child’s spirit. Spirit is fostered in children
through such modes of transmission as culture, spirituality, stories, and nurturance from
adults. The Anishnawbe Grandmothers interviewed for Muir et al.’s study agreed that the
fundamental goal of traditional Indigenous childrearing is to rear a child with a strong
spirit, which is believed to provide the child with the tools to deal with life, and to take on
responsibility for themselves and for others. Even when life presents significant stressors,
and an individual errs, or loses the way (by becoming addicted for example), a strong spirit
is believed to have the power to bring an Indigenous person back to the “right” path, often
with the help of the entire community.
Implicit and Explicit Bidirectional Intergenerational Transmission
Elders report that both implicit (modeling or action) and explicit (verbal teachings)
cultural instruction should be given to children. Kokomis Jacqui (Muir et al., unpublished
manuscript) described implicit instruction:
If you see [a] child going to the fire, then nobody makes a loud noise to get him
away, they go over there and physically move him back. Then [the child] goes there
again, physically move him back. No sounds are made. There is no tut-tutting or
thck thck, none of that…., a big person will go there and move the baby back. …
Once that happens, one time, every woman’s focus is on that baby, and they watch
him … go over to the fire and somebody else will go move him back.
Kinship. From a relational knowledge and Inuit epistemological perspective, kinship
29
is the foundation of Inuit social organization and life (Briggs et al,. 2000; Kral, 2011).
Kinship extends beyond familial and biological connection to other non-biological
affiliations including adoption, friendship, marriage or partnership, and namesake (Emdal-
Navne, 2008; Kral et al., 2011; Nuttall, 1992). In one of the few oral histories of Nunavut,
which shares the voices of Inuit elders, it is said that Inuit believe that three essential parts
made a human: body, soul, and name (Bennet and Rowley, 2004).
A nameless child was not fully human; giving it a name, whether before or after birth,
made it whole. Inuit did not have family surnames. Instead, each person’s name linked him
or her to a deceased relative or family friend, and the spirit of the person who has passed
on lived on in the child (Bennet and Rowley, 2004). Often the children will carry the spirit
and the traits of their namesake or avvrainnuk, such as hunting or sewing skills, and will
be protected by the name-soul connection. The relationship between the child and the
family of the namesake strengthened family bonds and created extended family networks
that would support the child and its character development throughout life (Karetak, 2013;
Tagalik, 2011). The name bestowed upon the child was the first step in establishing a
community around an individual beyond the immediate family and provided connections
to others (Bennet and Rowley, 2004; QHRC, 2012). This tradition is still prominent in Inuit
communities today and the naming tradition has been part of a process of reclaiming Inuit
family relationships after the separation events of the settlement period.
Ceremonies. Ceremonies provide opportunities for passing on knowledge, wisdom,
self-esteem, self-expression, respect, protection, strength, responsibility, and feelings of
connection. Kokomis Jacqui described specific Anishnawbe ceremonies performed after a
baby is born, such as putting the baby in warm cedar water immediately after birth (cited
30
in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript). Jacqui remembered how she, as an 8- or 9-year-
old was asked to assist with birthing traditions after her baby brother was born:
… [My mom] was having a hard time [getting the afterbirth from the nurses]. So
she looked at me and said, “You go ask about that”… And I [brought the afterbirth]
to my mom …and she said you bury it at the bottom of the tree…I was in charge
of that so when we got home, I toured the bush looking for the right tree to bury
this in so I found a really nice tree, a hemlock tree. … That’s the kind I was looking
for. … So I buried [the afterbirth] in there… I smudged the tree and talked to it. I
told the tree …”You’re supposed to be looking after this [baby] boy forever, as long
as he’s alive”.
Through the described ritual, Jacqui’s mother taught her about traditional
responsibility for others and how to protect and keep her brother safe. A similar teaching
exists for Māori, where the word whenua is used to describe the land and placenta (Mead
and Mead, 2003). After a child is born, the placenta is taken and buried in a place of
ancestral significance such as somewhere near the child’s tribal marae (land surrounding a
significant grouping of buildings used for everyday living, this area of land was where
Māori traditionally met and currently meet to engage in everyday life) (Mead and Mead,
2003).
The power of the ceremonies is affected by the extent to which the parents and other
community adults emphasize teachings and support and nurture the child (Dorothy, in Muir
et al., unpublished manuscript). Grandmother Dorothy, for example, spoke of the effect of
ceremony on her own granddaughter:
31
She’s been to ceremony since she was little. She knows how to behave in those
ceremonies, when to be quiet, when to start helping... And [there are] ceremonies
where she can’t go so I’ll explain to her why she can’t go. And we do our own
smudging and I explain to her why those medicines are so important to use. [I
explain about] some of the ceremonies that I do and why I do them. So …you’re
always talking to them and teaching them about those things. And taking her to
see… an Elder that came to do some drumming for the women and it’s all women,
they all brought their drums and I thought, what an important event for her to see.
So I brought her to see all those women and hear their voices just drumming away.
[It] was like a whole new experience for her. Events like that really have a powerful
impact in their little lives because …you see all these Native women, drumming,
singing their songs and, it’s for her, like ‘Wow, I can do that’.
According to Elders, the power of ceremonies expands a child’s experiences. Ceremonies
teach children what is expected of them, help children to see their capabilities, and foster
their self-esteem. Ceremonies, for example powwow dancing, transmit values and
teachings in an accessible and concrete format for children.
Transmission of cultural teachings through the bond with parents and community
and disciplining with respect. Cultural teachings and spirituality are transmitted through
the bond between parents, extended family members, the community and children.
Mainstream attachment theory focuses on fostering the maternal-infant relationship
through maternal responsiveness to children’s cues (Blum, 2004; Cummings and Warmuth,
2019). It appears that, contrary to contemporary Western parenting literature, the bond
between an Indigenous child and parents may be nurtured differently. Traditionally,
32
Indigenous peoples in Canada, for example, focused on creating “a nurturing environment
for child development utilizing multiple relationships with extended family and other
community members … [Indigenous mothers] believe that other caregivers are capable and
will be attentive and responsive to the child’s needs” (Benzies, 2014, p. 381). Indigenous
people in Australia view children as “bridges between generations and growing them up is
the responsibility of the whole community” (Cheater, 2014, p. 1). Prior to the influence of
colonialism, Indigenous childrearing involved the entire community, all members of which
were responsible for watching children, ensuring children’s safety, disciplining, and
providing teachings.
In Inuit communities, for example, Inunnguiniq is the term used to describe the
making of an able human being. This term is often used to describe childrearing in English,
but in fact, Inunnguiniq is a concept that applies across the life course. In a discussion about
the concept of inunnguiniq, family relationships and child rearing from an Inuit
perspective, Elders in Nunavut, Canada have described a puuq, a pouch, which
metaphorically hangs around a child’s neck near the child’s heart (EAC, 2010; Tagalik,
2011). As a child grows and develops, the puuq must be filled with positive articles such
as good words, values, love, safety, support, skills, practice, understanding, and knowledge
(Elders Advisory Committee 2010; Tagalik, 2011). These values and tools contribute to
the formation of the child’s personality and equip the child with the skills and support they
need to engage in positive relationships with others and cope successfully in life whether
it be in times of celebration, or through hardship or illness. Parents, caregivers, and
extended family kin make positive contributions to the child’s life and the puuq by
developing relationships, showing affection, caregiving, teaching, and supporting the child
33
(Tagalik, 2011). When a child experiences neglect, anger, hurt, abuse, or mistrust, the puuq
remains empty; thus, the child is not a whole person and, consequently, not able to develop
trusting relationships or cope well with life events (Tagalik, 2011). When viewed through
this explanation, one can see how the disruption of residential school and settlement events
in the history of colonized Indigenous peoples has had a significant impact on the children
who are now the parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents of children in care today.
Contemporary Western attachment theory also maintains that a bond needs to be
created and supported through reflective mutuality (Blum, 2004). Kokomis Jacqui noted
that Indigenous infants are thought to be already born strongly bonded with their mother
from the outset, and to have an immediate desire for closeness with their father (Muir et
al., unpublished manuscript). Indigenous infants who live with extended family members
can develop close bonds within kin relationships as well (Atwool, 2006). The
Grandmothers relayed that the bond children have with their parents is strong and cannot
be easily severed:
A child will always have that bond with their parents; [whether she or he is] being
raised by their mother alone … or their dad or both... The child will always look at
their parents as the ultimate people in the world… You can see that through your
child’s eyes that [you are] ‘it’. (Dorothy, in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript)
A baby, at birth, is believed to know her mother intimately because of the time the child
spent in the womb experiencing the mother’s emotions. This closeness to the mother
continues after the birth:
34
… [The baby] knows [his mother’s] sound, [the baby] knows when [his mother]
comes into the room, he [does not] even have to look over there. [He will] feel her.
(Jacqui, in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript)
Both Grandmothers spoke of disciplining children with respect. Respect during
discipline was maintained by disciplining in private; by giving guidance for dealing with
negative emotions; by explaining actions; and by using positive language without
intimidation. Kokomis Jacqui also described how her parents disciplined her by using
explanation and humour. Jacqui realized that:
There was some things I guess I [was not] supposed to open but I did and I know
[my mom] was kind of upset because I did that. And when I asked my dad, my dad
just looked at me and laughed and said, “It was probably someone’s spirit [and]
you let it go”. And I said, “Oh, do they live in there?” He said “Yeah”. So I never
touched them after that. But I [had] opened and smelled it and my mom said, “It
could have gone right into your whole body and possessed you”. And I said, “What
if it possessed me?” And she said, “You would be him”. And I said, “Oh, was it a
guy?” She said, “Yes it was”. So these kinds of things, it was funny but it was
instructions, [to] learn not to touch stuff. (cited in Muir et al., unpublished
manuscript)
Discipline often took the form of teaching, with the discipliner providing
explanations as to why a behavior was inappropriate. Discipline also could involve
community members. Kokomis Jacqui illustrated this:
…the whole community [was] raising up that child, so when that child is 7 or 8
running like crazy down the village, one adult will … take them by the arm, bring them
35
into the house and give them a glass of water, that has broken that spell of that child running
around like crazy, giving him a different thing to focus on- that water going down his
throat. Water is a blessing, so if the medicinal power of that water is that act of putting that
glass up to his lips has already broken that stuff that [the child] was involved [with]. (cited
in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript)
Intergenerational and bidirectional transmission. Another way of strengthening
culture is through bidirectional transmission of knowledge. Lessons are transferred from
parent to child and from grandparent to grandchild, and in Indigenous cultures the idea that
the child can also teach the adult is common and respected. Parents model values such as
respect and humility by allowing themselves to learn from their children.
Because we’re not just grandparents or parents … we’re also learning from [our
children] so it’s a two-way thing … your children teach you, and you’re also
teaching them. So it’s that respect and honour and love and kindness that you show
one another…. (Dorothy, in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript).
Transmission of culture may be seen as attached to DNA, when an Indigenous
person hears or sees their culture, their spirit remembers.
If we [do not] feel that, we hear somebody saying those words, we begin to think
about it, awareness has been awakened, that little bit of something different. And
that’s how Anishnawbe life is developed; it’s all those instincts that [are] that
seventh sense. It is that we already know certain things, those things that we know
are imparted to us from our dad’s seed and our mother’s egg and we make that
connection (Kokomis Jacqui, as quoted in Muir et al., unpublished manuscript).
36
Elders emphasize that it is important for adults to recognize the bi-directional nature of
parenting, and that they can learn from children as much as children learn from them:
[Children] try [to] keep you on that path right from the very beginning when they
start voicing their needs and their concerns. But as adults we have such a big head
that we think we know everything and we forget to incorporate all of senses when
[we are] dealing with our children. We close off our hearing; we
close off our sight, and our touch and all those things. And it creates a complicated
relationship with our young people and we say, “oh [there is] something wrong
here”. But you never look at yourself, how [you are] actually parenting. When you
ignore, or [you are] so shut off [then] that difficulty could be from you and not
from your child. I think [that is] really important that you always have to be aware
of all those senses and get back to where [the children] are at, like at what level
are they. (Dorothy, as cited by Muir et al., unpublished manuscript).
Importance of fathers. Kokomis Jacqui noted that every newborn baby knows
that he or she has a father and desires closeness to the father (Muir et al., unpublished
manuscript). This belief belies Western attachment theory which maintains that a parental
bond needs to be developed gradually through responsive and sensitive caregiving (Blum,
2004), Colonization has affected fathers’ lives with their children. For example in
interviews with Australian Indigenous fathers who were currently in prison, it was found
that nearly half of these inmates had grown up without their father present, and a quarter
reported abusive parenting. Still, 41% of these men made an effort to parent from prison
(Dennison, Smallbone, Stewart, Frieberg, and Teaque, 2014). In Australia, New Zealand,
and Canada, Indigenous fathers (and mothers) are overrepresented in the justice system
37
(Muir and Roesch, 2017, unpublished manuscript; Marchetti and Anthony, n.d.). Indeed,
disproportionate criminalization is yet another way in which colonialism has affected and
disrupted parenting, particularly for Indigenous men who tend not to be as involved in the
conducted interviews with Indigenous mothers in Canada, who suggested that fathers have
been absent for at least two generations; that they themselves were reared without their
fathers, and that the fathers of their children were also not involved in parenting.
In spite of cultural values and expectations that support the importance of fathers
in their children’s lives, contemporary fathers in many Indigenous communities have been
largely absent from their children’s lives. Many explanations for this absence lead back to
colonialism, which has disrupted and impaired fathers’ traditional roles in their families
and their communities. Despite a growing awareness of the effects of multi-generational
trauma on father-child relationships, in Canada and other nations, funding that supports
parenting and family counselling programs is still directed primarily to Indigenous women
and children (Ball and Moselle, 2015).
Obstacles to Keeping Indigenous Cultural Values Alive in Childrearing
Indigenous cultures have suffered assaults of many types over several generations,
making it extremely challenging to keep cultural values alive and to ensure their
transmission to offspring. In addition to the lingering malignant effects of colonialism,
Indigenous cultures also have to cope with the effects of fast moving, unrelenting cultural
changes, for example technological environments that are more directed to serving
individualism than community-oriented life. So-called progress in developed countries
may not always be very compatible with traditional Indigenous beliefs and practices
designed to support resilience in children and youth.
38
Obstacles to realizing the goals of Indigenous childrearing may be linked to gaps
in the transmission of cultural values, gaps that are due to historical interference, and the
nefarious influences of contemporary Western societies. Residential schools had a
profound impact on families, communities, and Indigenous traditions, including
childrearing, and strongly dampened spirit. Removed from their families, Indigenous
children were no longer the center of a large and loving family and community that allowed
them autonomy and access to teachings, language, and ceremonies. Intergenerational
trauma has been noted in communities that were traumatized by the removal of children
first in the era of Residential schooling, and next, ironically, following that era, when
parents who had endured residential schools as children began to have their own, and were
wholly unprepared for the experience. Even though many Indigenous peoples choose to
live in contemporary urban settings, these communities often feel foreign and unkind,
resulting in poverty and addictions that make it difficult for traditional cultural and spiritual
parenting values to thrive (Litwin et al., in under review). In contemporary times, it may
be difficult for Indigenous parents to access cultural teachings, depending on where they
live. Indigenous parents may need to make an increased effort to connect with other
families that they see as role models, to attend ceremonies or to receive teachings from
Elders, particularly with Elders from the parents’ particular Nation. The challenge with
integrating traditional practices into life in contemporary society brings both joy and
creates stress for Indigenous peoples who aim to return to culture-specific childrearing
practices. It is hoped that, in future, Indigenous researchers will be able to assist with this
return to culturally congruent childrearing.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR INDIGENOUS CHILDREARING RESEARCH
39
Indigenous people in many communities are beginning to demand that research that
pertains to them utilize more appropriate, “decolonized” methodologies (see for example
Smith, 2012). Some countries, for example Canada, have taken steps to ensure a shift in
the way that research is conducted with Indigenous populations. Canadian Institutes of
Health Research (CIHR), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council
(NSERC), and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) are the
three primary research-funding councils in Canada, known as “Tri-Council”. As a
condition of receiving funding from one of these councils for research involving
Indigenous peoples, all researchers must agree to adhere to specific guidelines that conform
to a Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS 2; 2015). TCPS 2 notes that the history of
research with Indigenous people has been “defined and carried out primarily by non-
[Indigenous] researchers. The approaches used in the past have not generally reflected
[Indigenous] worldviews, and the research has not necessarily benefited [Indigenous]
peoples or communities. As a result, [Indigenous] peoples continue to regard research,
particularly research originating outside their communities, with a certain apprehension or
mistrust” (TCPS, Chapter 9, n.p.). The purpose of the guidelines is to direct ethical conduct
for research involving Indigenous people, as the significant social, cultural, and linguistic
differences that exist between Indigenous people and Non-Indigenous researchers increase
the risk for misunderstanding (TCPS, Chapter 9, 2015). The TCPS Policy requires different
engagement protocols depending on characteristics of the Indigenous participants in the
study. If the participants are from a specific Indigenous community, then the community
must be engaged. For example, this community engagement entails engagement with the
40
Tribal Council in a community or with an Indigenous service agency if the Indigenous
participants are from an urban centre (TCPS, Chapter 9, 2015).
Below we illustrate principles and frameworks that should be incorporated in
research conducted with Indigenous parents. The Respect, Relevance, Reciprocal
relationships, and Responsibility framework (4 Rs; Kirkness and Barnhardt, 1991) the
Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP; Schnarch, 2003) and Participatory
Action Research (PAR) are three models that are recommended for use in childrearing
research.
The Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP) research protocol was
developed at the National Steering Committee of the First Nations Regional Longitudinal
Health Survey (Schnarch, 2004). The principle of Ownership denotes that participant
Indigenous communities or organizations own any data collected from themselves, and
must be consulted whenever these data are used (Schnarch, 2004). Control indicates that
Indigenous people have the right to control all aspects of the research, from the very
beginning of the project to its completion. Access denotes the absolute right of Indigenous
people to have access to all of their proprietary data and information about themselves and
their communities. Finally, Possession is more literal that Ownership, meaning that
possession is a means of protecting the data from misuse or for monetary gain, for example,
to ensure that Indigenous participants maintain power (Schnarch, 2004).
The Respect, Relevance, Reciprocal relationships, and Responsibility framework
(4 Rs; Kirkness and Barnhardt, 1991) was first developed as a framework for academic
institutions with the goal of more fully supporting and retaining Indigenous university
students and was later adapted for use in research. The value Respect suggests the need to
41
have respect for Indigenous individuals, families, communities, and the traditions,
traditional knowledge, and values they hold. Relevance indicates that Indigenous
knowledge, traditions, and values should be incorporated into Western institutional values,
and goes beyond respect. A reciprocal relationship implies that both Indigenous and
Western knowledge are useful and necessary. Responsibility incorporates that Indigenous
people have the right to be involved in the research that pertains to them to have control
over their own lives (Kirkness and Barnhardt, 1991).
Participatory Action Research (PAR) is a research framework that any research
participants should be defining and studying solutions for their own communities in a way
that is culturally relevant and ensures their control (Maar et al., 2011). Researchers who
employ PAR share, or give up their control over their research to the Indigenous
communities they study, so as to better serve these communities (Jacklin and Kinoshameg,
2008). Jacklin and Kinoshameg (2008) described PAR as a framework in which the
Indigenous community develops the research project including the research questions,
plans and develops the project itself, and is highly involved every step of the way in the
implementation and evaluation of the project. PAR includes research negotiation and
planning (doing a community needs assessment); developing the research materials
(developing a survey or interview guide); advertising/community communication (letting
the community know about the project and what it entails); hiring and training community-
based research assistants (to strengthen community capacity); ensuring that even hard to
reach community members are included; and dissemination (ensuring that the community
gets the results of the research in plain language and to assist that the results can be used
to better the community; Jacklin and Kinoshameg, 2008). With research that is not directly
42
associated with an Indigenous community or agency (a research sample that happens to
include 25% Indigenous parents), PAR directs that still, a Non-Indigenous institution
should either form an Indigenous advisory committee or partner with an Indigenous agency
to consult and to ensure that pragmatic and respectful research is done.
Inuit Community Research Approach
Increasing attention on the Arctic has led to an increase in research in these northern
lands and communities. The development of research and evaluation frameworks that
originate from Inuit epistemologies and methodologies has been an area of focus for the
Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre in Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada. Over a multi-year
process, which involved community engagement and dialogue throughout the territory, the
Piliriqatigiiniiq Community Health Research Model was developed and later published to
share the voices of communities with academia. The model weaves Inuit concepts of
Inuuqatigiittiarniq (“being respectful of all people”), Unikkaaqatigiinniq (“storytelling and
the power of story”), Pittiarniq (“being kind and good”), and Iqqaumaqatigiinniq (“all
things coming into one”) and Piliriqatigiinniq (“working together for the common good”)
into a responsive community health research model grounded in Inuit ways of knowing
(Healey and Tagak Sr., 2014). The model serves as a reminder to look beyond the scope of
what is commonly defined as ‘health’ and ‘research’ to include knowledge holders and
stakeholders from other disciplines and walks of life. This model was developed to provide
practical organizational and methodological guidance, however the foundations run much
deeper. While the model originated from a health perspective, the underlying principle is
cross cutting and interdisciplinary. The model is structured on the relational aspects of life
in Indigenous communities – the relationships that are shared are the foundation from
43
which we move forward to achieve wellness. Those relationships can be with anyone from
any walk of life and with any thing from any environment. The knowledge that is shared
and created in this space is helpful for everyone. The motivations with which one engages
in the project are the same – coming together for the common good and the betterment of
health and wellness. The research group is accountable to each other, to the relationships
they have formed and/or will form together, and the relationships they have with others in
their community. From this epistemological perspective, ethics, accountability,
methodology, knowledge, understanding, and our relationships with each other as human
beings and our environments are part of the same space.
Kaupapa Māori Research
Over the past two decades there has been an increasing awareness from academia
to acknowledge Māori epistemology coupled with Māori ways of conducting research.
This body of knowledge has come to be known as Kaupapa Māori research (Health
Research Council, 2008). Kaupapa Māori research includes methodology, epistemology,
theory, Māori tikanga (cultural practices) and the implementation of research that benefits
Māori whilst at the same time being produced by Māori (Health Research Council, 2008).
Kaupapa Māori research also encompasses an analytical approach that is about thinking
critically, which includes critiquing western definitions and constructions of Māori people
and their worldview. It is also about valuing Māori self-determination and encouraging
participation in the research process (Smith, 1999). Kaupapa Māori research does not
exclude the use of other methods but it seeks to integrate them in a culturally sensitive way
that is beneficial for Māori (Smith, 1999).
44
In order to conduct research that is beneficial to Māori it is important to reflect first
on how Māori have understood research that has been conducted on them rather than for
them. Research that has been conducted in the past has often been detrimental to Māori
communities (Smith, 1999) as the history of research within New Zealand has often
reflected a distinct patriarchal process in which Māori have been further marginalised in
every domain of society (Edwards, McManus, and McCreanor, 2005). The challenge for
researchers is to work in partnership with Māori so that the outcomes can benefit both
Māori and researcher.
Currently there are many models within New Zealand that are used to highlight best
practice with Māori families. Most seek to employ a holistic focus; Durie was first to
publish a model known as Te Whare Tapa Whā (1994). This model seeks to take into
account the holistic approach for researchers and clinicians when working with Māori
whanau. Te Whare Tapa Whā utilises the metaphor of the four walls of a house when
thinking about what is needed for a healthy individual. The individual needs to be
connected to their family (whānau), have good physical health (tinana), be well
psychologically and emotionally (Hinengaro) and be aware and connected spiritually
(wairua). This model is the cornerstone of other Māori health and well-being models that
such as Te Wheke (Pere, 1991). A current school of thought that has gained traction of late
in New Zealand is called He Awa Whiria (Braided Rivers approach). This model combines
western empirical western paradigms with Kaupapa Māori knowledge (MacFarland,
2012).
The New Zealand government has an agency that assists researchers and social
service agencies to evaluate what they do for families, this agency is called Superu. They
45
have developed the Whānau Rangatiratanga Conceptual Framework-Hikoi Ngatahi, which
draws on Māori principles to measure and understand outcomes of whānau wellbeing. This
framework describes 20 Māori-specific wellbeing domains that can be measured. These
well-being domains are centred on five key prinicples such as: Whakapapa (Māori are
aware of who their ancestors, whānau and iwi are), Manaakitanga (the practice of
reciprocity and support, acknowledging the mana, status and obligations that Māori have
to others), Rangatiratanga (the practice of governance and leadership, how whānau are
connected to developing knowledge of their own culture, education and economic
security), Kotahitanga (a sense of unity, whānau developing a connection to institutions
that can empower them), and Wairuatanga (whānau are able to connect and embrace
spirituality, develop resilience and access and express their culture). This approach is
considered to be an example of the He Awa Whiria (Braided Rivers approach).
Future Research
It is hoped that future parenting and child development research conducted in
Indigenous communities will always be culturally respectful: one way to safeguard this
principle is to ensure that the research methodologies originate from Indigenous
worldviews. Drawing on some of the frameworks discussed above would be a good start.
Indigenous childrearing practices continue to be understudied and are discussed
primarily in the context of child protection and welfare. The challenge for future
researchers will be to contextualize the study of risk within a deep understanding of
Indigenous childrearing values and the ensuing practices. A study of urban Indigenous
women found that having a strong affiliation with their culture acted as a protective factor
for Indigenous mothers of infants, and was associated with lower levels of stress, higher
46
levels of perceived social support, and increased positive parenting practices (Litwin et al.,
under review). In that study, maternal cultural affiliation was strongly associated with more
optimal childhood outcomes. In an evaluation of an Inunnguiniq revitalization program for
caregivers, parents, and extended family in Inuit communities in Nunavut, caregivers
reported feeling more grounded and competent in Inuit cultural teachings, and most
importantly, reported observing positive changes in their children in the home environment
after implementing the Inunnguiniq teachings within the family (Healey, 2015). The results
of such studies lend credence to a call for culturally competent research of the goals,
principles, and instrumental aspects of Indigenous parenting.
Western norms and methodologies may not satisfactorily assess diverse and unique
socioeconomic and contextual factors that affect Indigenous parents and their children’s
development (Simard and Blight, 2011). Trauma experienced by Indigenous peoples,
which has resulted from government policies, is intensified by a general denial about the
trauma and loss that resulted (Haskell and Randall, 2009). However, there is scant
acknowledgment of present-day colonial practices and how they continue to affect
Indigenous parenting.
CONCLUSIONS
Indigenous parenting values and practices, like all cultures’ parenting norms, aim
to support healthy development and resilience in offspring. Despite the disruptions and
trauma caused by decades of assault on their culture, Indigenous childrearing traditions
have survived in many communities and are experiencing resurgence. Many aspects of
Indigenous parenting continue to govern how Indigenous families organize their family
life; indeed, identifiable differences exist between parenting norms in Indigenous
47
communities and those of Western groups. The values that differ between Indigenous and
non-Indigenous childrearing include a focus on strong spirit and how to build it, a focus on
non-interference and autonomy, discipline methods, extended family and community
member involvement in childrearing, the use of ceremony to teach values, and differing
attachments/connectivity. A better understanding of the differences is hampered by the
dearth of research on Indigenous childrearing, especially when considering the diversity of
Indigenous cultures. Indeed, teachings vary greatly from nation to nation, and it would be
a mistake to suggest that there is such a thing as “pan-Indigenousness” (i.e., one Indigenous
culture): There are many different Nations and many different parenting and childrearing
teachings and approaches.
It is imperative that more culturally respectful and comprehensive examinations of
parenting and child development in diverse Indigenous cultures be undertaken, so as to
more usefully inform decisions made by professionals such as parenting educators and
social workers in the areas of child welfare and child and family mental health.
Professionals who have a thorough understanding of cultural and systemic factors that
characterize Indigenous family life will be better equipped to make decisions that result in
the safety and well-being of Indigenous children and families, while tending to their
cultural needs and avoiding unnecessary family separations that could result in re-
traumatization. Efforts to Indigenize and decolonize research methodologies, alongside
initiatives to develop culturally embedded parenting programs have resulted in promising
curricula that are sure to support Indigenous family resilience, for example, the
Inunnguiniq Parenting/Childrearing Program (Healey, 2015). It is our hope that similar
48
culture-specific, respectful and strength-focused offerings will soon become accessible to
Indigenous parents everywhere.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to acknowledge the teachings of Grandmother Dorothy and Kokomis Jacqui
as well as Rhoda Karetak and Atuat Akittirg.
49
REFERENCES
Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC). (2010). Backgrounder:
Indian residential schools truth and reconciliation commission. Retrieved from
Government Canada Website http://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100015
752/1100100015753
Abbot, K. (2003). Urban Aboriginal women in British Columbia and the impacts of the
matrimonial real property regime. Retrieved from http://www.aadnc-
aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100032669/1100100032761#chp2
Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., and Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment:
Assessed in the strange situation and at home.
Allan, B. and Smylie, J. (2015). First Peoples, second class treatment: The role of racism
in the health and well-being of Indigenous peoples in Canada. Toronto, ON: The
Wellesley Institute.
Atwool, N. (2006). Attachment and resilience: Implications for children in care. Child Care
in Practice, 12 (4), 315-330.
Ball, J., and Moselle, S. (2015). Aboriginal fathers in Canada. Retrieved from
http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/textes-
experts/en/4513/aboriginal-fathers-in-canada.pdf
Barnard, K. E. (1986). Nursing child assessment satellite training (NCAST): Learning
resource manual. Seattle: University of Washington.
Bennet, J., & Rowley, S. (2004). Uqalurait: An oral history of Nunavut. Montreal, PQ:
McGill Queen's University Press.
50
Benzies, K. M. (2014). Parenting in Canadian Aboriginal cultures. In Selin, H. (Eds.),
Parenting across cultures (pp. 379-392). Springer Netherlands.
Bertsch, M., Bidgood, B. A. (2010). Why is adoption like a First Nations feast? Lax
Kw’alaarms Indigenizing adoptions in child welfare. First Peoples Child and
Family Review, 5(1), 96-105.
Best Start Resource Centre. (2012). Supporting the Sacred journey: From preconception to
parenting for First Nations families in Ontario. Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Retrieved
from http://www.beststart.org/resources/ rep_health/pdf
/SupportingtheSacredJourney.pdf
Biggs, B. (2012). The Complete English–Māori Dictionary. Auckland University Press.
Biggs, J. (1998) Inuit morality play: The emotional education of a 3-year old. Newhaven:
Yale University Press.
Briggs, J., Ekho, N., & Ottokie, U. (2000). Childrearing Practices (Vol. 3). Iqaluit, NU: :
Nunavut Arctic College.
Blackstock, C. (2003). First Nations child and family services: Restoring peace and
harmony in First Nations communities. In K. Kufeldt, and B. McKenzie (Eds.),
Child welfare: Connecting research policy and practice (pp. 331−342). Waterloo,
ON: Wilfred Laurier University Press.
Blum, H. (2004). Separation-individuation theory and attachment theory. Journal of the
American Psychoanalytic Association, 52, 535-553.
Bombay, A., Matheson, K., and Anisman, H. (2009). Intergenerational Trauma. Journal
de la Santé Autochtone. Retrieved from http://www.naho.ca/jah/english
/jah05_03/V5_I3_ Intergenerational_01.pdf
51
Bombay, A., Matheson, K., and Anisman, H. (2011). The impact of stressors on second
generation Indian residential school survivors. Transcultural Psychiatry, 48, 367-
391.
Bombay, A., Matheson, K., and Anisman, H. (2014). The intergenerational effects of
Indian Residential Schools: Implications for the concept of historical trauma.
Transcultural Psychiatry, 51, 320-338.
Bornstein, M. H. (Ed.). (1991). Cultural approaches to parenting. Psychology Press.
Bornstein, M. H. (2012). Cultural approaches to parenting. Parenting,12 (2-3), 212-221.
Bornstein, M. H. (2015). Children’s parents. In M. H. Bornstein and T. Leventhal (Eds.),
Ecological settings and processes in developmental systems. Volume 4 of the
Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (7th ed., pp. 55-132).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Brave Heart, M. Y. H., and DeBruyn, L. M. (1998). The American Indian holocaust:
Healing historical unresolved grief. American Indian and Alaska Native Mental
Health Research, 8(2), 56-78.
Brave Heart-Jordan, M. Y. H. (1995). The return to the sacred path: Healing from
historical trauma and historical unresolved grief among the Lakota: a dissertation
based upon an independent investigation. (Doctoral dissertation, Smith College
School for Social Work).
Buti, A. (2002). The removal of Aboriginal children: Canada and Australia
compared. University of Western Sydney Law Review. Retrieved from
http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UWSLRev/2002/2.html
52
Carriere, J., and Richardson, C. (2009). From longing to belonging: Attachment theory,
connectedness, and Indigenous children in Canada. In S. McKay, D. Fuchs, and I.
Brown (Eds.), Passion of action in child and family services: Voices from the
prairies (p.49-67). Regina, SK: Canadian Plains Research Centre.
Cheah, C. S., and Chirkov, V. (2008). Parents' personal and cultural beliefs regarding
young children: A cross-cultural study of Aboriginal and Euro-Canadian
mothers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 39, 402-423.
Cheah, C. S., and Sheperd, K. A. (2011). A cross cultural examination of Aboriginal and
European Canadian mothers' beliefs regarding proactive and reactive
aggression. Infant and Child Development, 20, 330-346.
Cheater, C. (2014). Growing up boys and girls: age and gender in traditional Australian
Aboriginal parenting practices. In 4th Global Conference Childhood: A Persons
Project.
Chown Oved, M. (2015). Seven native youth left for high school and never returned:
Finally, an inquest. The Star. Retrieved from
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/09/16/seven-native-youth-left-for-
high-school-and-never-returned-finally-an-inquest.html
Cochrane, R. (1992). Child abuse in Aboriginal families and its effects on the children's
learning. Early Child Development and Care, 81(1), 131-136.
Coleman, H., Unrau, Y. and Manyfingers, B. (2001). Revamping family preservation
services for Native families. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity in Social
Work, 10(1), pp. 48-68.
Cooper, G., Arago-Kemp, V., Wylie, C., and Hodgen, E. (2004). Te rerenga ä te pïrere: a
53
longitudinal study of köhanga reo and kura kaupapa Mäori students-Phase I Report.
Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER. Retrieved from
http://www.nzcer.org.nz/system/files/12740.pdf
Crengle, S., Clark, T. C., Robinson, E., Bullen, P., Dyson, B., Denny, S., et al. (2012). The
health and well-being of Māori New Zealand secondary school students in 2012.
Te Ara Whakapiki Taitamariki: Youth ’12. New Zealand: The University of
Auckland: The Adolescent Health Research Group.
Dalla, R. L., and Gamble, W. C. (1997). Exploring factors related to parenting competence
among Navajo teenage mothers: Dual techniques of inquiry. Family Relations, 46,
113-121.
Dennison, S., Smallbone, H., Stewart, A., Freiberg, K., and Teague, R. (2014). ‘My life is
separated’ an examination of the challenges and barriers to parenting for Indigenous
fathers in prison. British Journal of Criminology, 54(6), 1089-1108.
Dionne, R., Davis, B., Sheeber, L., and Madrigal, L. (2009). Initial evaluation of a cultural
approach to implementation of evidence based parenting interventions in American
Indian communities. Journal of Community Psychology, 37, 911–921.
Dorion, L. M. (2010). Opikinawasowin: The life long process of growing Cree and Metis
children. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from communityschools.ca
Durie, M. (1994). Whaiora. Māori Health Development. Auckland: Oxford University
Press.
Edwards, S., McManus, V., & McCreanor, T. (2005). Collaborative research with Māori
on sensitive issues: The application of tikanga and kaupapa in research on Māori
sudden infant death syndrome. Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 25, 88-104.
54
Elders Advisory Committee (2010). Child development – the puuq. Ed. Karetak, J.
Curriculum Support Services, Dept. of Education, Government of Nunavut.
Unpublished.
Ellison-Loschmann, L., and Pearce, N. (2006). Improving access to health care among New
Zealand’s Māori population. American Journal of Public Health, 96(4), 612-617.
Emdal-Navne, L. (2008). Fleksibelt Moderskab: Reproduktive beslutninger, livsforløb og
slægtskab i Grønland ("Flexible Motherhood: Reproductive decisions in life and
kinship in Greenland"). (PhD), Copenhagen University, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Eni, R., and Phillips-Beck, W. (2013). Teenage pregnancy and parenthood perspectives of
First Nations women. The International Indigenous Policy Journal, 4(1). Retrieved
from http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/iipj/vol4/iss1/3
Evans-Campbell, T. (2008). Historical trauma in American Indian/Native Alaska
communities: A multilevel framework for exploring impacts on individuals,
families, and communities. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23, 316-338.
Fasoli, L. and Johns, V. (2007). Children's services in remote Australian Indigenous
communities: Practices and challenges. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 30,
83-100.
Gerlach, A. (2008). “Circle of caring”: A First Nations worldview of childrearing.
Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 75(1), 18-26.
Harris, B., Russell, M., and Gockel, A. (2007). The impact of poverty on First Nations
mothers attending a parenting program. First People’s Child and Family Review,
3, 21-30.
55
Haskell, L., and Randall, M. (2009). Disrupted attachments: A social context complex
trauma framework and the lives of Aboriginal people in Canada. Journal of
Aboriginal Health, 5, 48-99.
Healey, G. (2016). Inunnguiniq parenting program for Nunavummiut - Final evaluation
report, 2010-2015. Retrieved from http://www.qhrc.ca/sites/default/files/
inunnguiniq_parenting_program_evaluation_2010-2015_-_feb_2015.pdf
Healey, G. K. (2015) Inunnguiniq Childrearing Program –5-year evaluation. Iqaluit, NU:
Qaujigairtiit Health Research Centre.
Healey, G. K. (2016) (Re)settlement, displacement, and family separation: Contributors to
health inequality in Nunavut. The Northern Review. 42: 75-96.
Healey, G., & Tagak Sr., A. (2014). Piliriqatigiinniq 'working in a collaborative way for
the common good': A perspective on the space where health research methodology
and Inuit epistemology come together. International Journal of Critical Indigenous
Studies, 7(1), 1-14.
Health Canada (2012). First Nations and Inuit Health. Retrieved from Government Canada
Website http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fniah-spnia/services/indiresident /indexeng.php
Health Research Council. (2008). Guidelines for researchers on research with Māori .
Health Research Council of New Zealand. Retrieved from
http://www.hrc.govt.nz/sites/default/files/Guidelines%20for%20HR%20on%20M
āori -%20Jul10%20revised%20for%20Te%20Ara% 20Tika%20v2%
20FINAL[1].pdf
56
Helu, S. L., Robinson, E., Grant, S., Herd, R., and Denny, S. (2009). Youth '07 the health
and well-being of secondary school students in New Zealand: Results for Pacific
young people. Auckland, New Zealand: The University of Auckland.
Horwitz, A. V., Widom, C. S., McLaughlin, J., and White, H. R. (2001). The impact of
childhood abuse and neglect on adult mental health: A prospective study. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 42, 184-201.
Ing, N. R. (1991). The effects of residential schools on Native childrearing practices.
Canadian Journal of Native Education, 18, 65-118.
Jacklin, K., and Kinoshameg, P. (2008). Developing a participatory Aboriginal health
research project: “Only if it's going to mean something”. Journal of Empirical
Research on Human Research Ethics, 3(2), 53-67.
Javo, C., Alapack, R., Heyerdahl, S., and Ronning, J. A. (2003). Parental values and ethnic
identity in Indigenous Sami families: A qualitative study. Family Process, 42, 151-
164.
Javo, C., Ronning, J. A., and Heyerdahl, S. (2004). Childrearing in an Indigenous Sami
population in Norway: A cross-cultural comparison of parental attitudes and
expectations. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 45, 67–78.
Johnston, P. (1983). Native children and the child welfare system. Canadian Council on
Social Development. Lorimer.
Karetak, J. (2013). Conversations of Inuit Elders in relation to the Maligait (Inuit laws).
Transcripts of conversations with Inuit elders. Nunavut Dept. of Education.
Curriculum Support Services.
57
Karetak, J., Tester, F., & Tagalik, S. (Eds.) (2017) Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit: What Inuit
have always known to be true. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.
Kral, M. J., Idlout, L., Minore, J. B., Dyck, R. J., & Kirmayer, L. J. (2011). Unikkaartuit:
Meanings of well-being, happiness, health, and community change among Inuit in
Canada. American Journal of Community Psychology, 48, 426-438.
King, D. P. (2006). A brief report of the federal government of Canada's residential school
system for Inuit. Aboriginal Healing Foundation= Fondation autochtone de
guérison. Retrieved from http://www.ahf.ca/downloads/kingsummaryfweb.pdf
Kruske, S., Belton, S., Wardaguga, M., and Narjic, C. (2012). Growing up our way: The
first year of life in remote Aboriginal Australia. Qualitative Health Research, 22,
777–787.
Litwin, L., Bohr, B. and Muir, N. M. (under review). Using a resilience framework to
understand Aboriginal parenting of infants in an urban community.
Lefley, H. (1976). Acculturation, childrearing, and self-esteem in two North American
Indian tribes. Ethos, 4(3), 385-401.
Levendosky, A. A., and Graham-Bermann, S. A. (2000). Trauma and parenting in battered
women: An addition to an ecological model of parenting. Journal of Aggression,
Maltreatment and Trauma, 3(1), 25-35.
Little Soldier, L. (1985). To soar with the eagles: Enculturation and acculturation of Indian
children. Childhood Education, 61, 185-191.
Loppie, C. (2007). Learning from the Grandmothers: Incorporating Indigenous principles
into qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 276-284.
58
MacDonald-Clark, N. J., and Boffman, J. L. (1995). Mother-child interaction among the
Alaskan Eskimos. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, and Neonatal Nursing, 24,
450-457.
Macfarlane, A. H. (2012). “Other” education Down-Under: Indigenising the discipline for
psychologists and specialist educators. Other Education, 1(1), 205-225.
Marchetti, E., and Anthony, T. (2016). University of Technology Sydney Law Research
Series. Sentencing Indigenous offenders in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand
UTSLRS 27. Oxford Handbooks Online. Retrieved from
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/UTSLRS/2016/27.html
McGowan, P. O., Sasaki, A., D'Alessio, A. C., Dymov, S., Labonté, B., Szyf, M., ... and
Meaney, M. J. (2009). Epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor in
human brain associates with childhood abuse. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 342-348.
McGregor, H. (2010). Inuit Education and Schools in the Eastern Arctic. Vancouver, BC:
UBC Press.
McShane, K. E., Hastings, P.D., Smylie, J. K., Prince, C. and The Tungasuvvingat Inuit
Resource Centre. (2009). Examining evidence for autonomy and relatedness in
urban Inuit parenting. Culture Psychology 15, 411-431.
Mead, H. M., and Mead, S. M. (2003). Tikanga Māori: living by Māori values. Huia
Publishers.
Ministry of Social Development (2010). The social report. Tē purongo oranga tangata.
Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Social Development. Retrieved from
http://socialreport.msd.govt.nz/2010/index.html
59
Mooradian, J. K., Cross, S. L. and Stutzky, G. R. (2006). Across generations: Culture,
history, and policy in the social ecology of American Indian grandparents
parenting their grandchildren. Journal of Family Social Work, 10, 81-101.
Muir, N. M. and Bohr, Y. (2014). Contemporary practice of traditional Aboriginal child
rearing: A review. First Peoples Child and Family Review, 9(1), 66-79.
Muir, N. M., and Roesch, R. (2017). Colonialism and Indigenous overrepresentation in the
Canadian justice system: Current state of the research. Unpublished manuscript.
Muir, N. M., Litwin, L. and Bohr, Y., Indigenous child rearing teachings from Elders.
Unpublished manuscript.
Neckoway, R. (2011). The role of culture in parenting: Some Ojibway parents'
perspectives. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and
Theses, PsycINFO (AAINR82001).
Nuttall, M. (1992). Arctic Homeland: Kinship, community, and development in northwest
Greenland. Toronto and Buffalo: University of Toronto Press.
Orange, C. (2015). The Treaty of Waitangi. Bridget Williams Books.
Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada. (2012). Annual report. Retrieved from
http://pauktuutit.ca/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/assets/Pauktuutit_
AnnualReport_2011-2012_English_WEB.pdf
Pauktuutit. (2007). Sivumuapallianiq: National Inuit Residential Schools Healing strategy;
the Journey Forward. Ottawa, ON: Pauktuutit Inuit Women’s Association of
Canada.
60
Penehira, M., and Doherty, L. (2013). Tu mai te oriori, nau mai te hauora! A Kaupapa
Māori approach to infant mental health: Adapting mellow parenting for Māori
mothers in Aotearoa, New Zealand. Pimatisiwin, 10(3), 367-382.
Pere, R. R., & Nicholson, N. (1991). Te wheke a celebration of infinite wisdom.
Pitama, S. M. (1997, June). The effects of traditional and non-traditional practices on
Māori mental health. Proceedings of the International Conference on Adoption
and Healing, Wellington, New Zealand, New Zealand Adoption Education and
Healing Trust.
Pooyak, S., and Gomez, Y. (2009). Using a narrative approach to understanding the
frontline practices and experiences of Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal child
protection works. First Peoples Child and Family Review, 4, 10-17.
Public Health Agency of Canada (2013). Aboriginal children: The healing power of
cultural identity. Retrieved from http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/hp-ps/dca-dea/prog-
ini/ahsunc-papacun/aboriginal-autochtones-eng.php
Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre (QHRC) (2012). Inunnguiniq parenting program.
Paper presented at the Nunavut-Greenland Circumpolar Conference on Education,
Iqaluit, NU
Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre (2015) Inunnguiniq childrearing program curriculum
manual. Iqaluit, NU: Qaujigiartiit Health Research Centre.
Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA) (2010). Qikiqtani Truth Commission final report:
Achieving Saimaqatigiingniq.
61
Rau, C., and Ritchie, J. (2011). Ahakoa he iti: Early childhood pedagogies affirming of
Māori children's rights to their culture. Early Education and Development, 22(5),
795-817.
Red Horse, J. (1997). Traditional American Indian family systems. Family Systems and
Health 15, 243-250.
Ritchie, J. (2007). New Zealand families: Childrearing practices and attitudes. In A.
Weatherall, M. Wilson, D. Harper and J. McDowall (Ed/s), Psychology in
Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 48-53). Auckland, New Zealand: Pearson Education
New Zealand.
Roberts, R., O’Connor, T., Dunn, J., Golding, J., and ALSPAC Study Team. (2004). The
effects of child sexual abuse in later family life; mental health, parenting and
adjustment of offspring. Child Abuse and Neglect, 28(5), 525-545.
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Royal Commission on Aboriginal
Peoples. People to people, nation to nation: Highlights from the report of the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Canada. Retrieved from http://www.aadnc-
aandc.gc.ca/eng/1100100014597/1100100014637
Russell, A. (2016). What was the ‘60s Scoop? Aboriginal children taken from homes a
dark chapter in Canada’s history. Global News. Retrieved from
http://globalnews.ca/news/2898190/what-was-the-60s-scoop-aboriginal-children-
taken-from-homes-a-dark-chapter-in-canadas-history/
Ryan, F. (2011). Kanyininpa (Holding): A way of nurturing children in Aboriginal
Australia. Australian Social Work, 64, 183-197.
62
Salmond, A. (1997). Between worlds: Early exchanges between Māori and Europeans
1773-1815 (1st). Auckland: Viking.
Schnarch, B. (2004). Ownership, control, access, and possession (OCAP) or self-
determination applied to research: A critical analysis of contemporary First Nations
research and some options for First Nations communities. International Journal of
Indigenous Health, 1(1), 80-95.
Smith, D., Varcoe, C., and Edwards, N. (2005). Turning around the intergenerational
impact of residential schools on Aboriginal people: Implications for health policy
and practice. Canadian Journal of Nursing Research, 37, 38-60.
Smith, L. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. New
York: Zed Books Ltd.
Smith, L. T. (2013). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. Zed
Books Ltd.
Statistics Canada (2011). Canadian National household survey. Government of Canada.
Superu. (2016). The Whānau Rangatiratanga Frameworks: Approaching whānau wellbeing
from within Te Ao Māori. Retrieved from
http://www.superu.govt.nz/whanau_rangatiratanga_frameworks
Tagalik, S. (2011). A discussion of Inuit perspectives on child development - the 'puuq'.
Personal Communication.
Tri-Council Policy Statement (TCPS 2). Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Natural
Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, and Social Sciences and
Humanities Research Council of Canada, Tri-Council Policy Statement: Ethical
63
Conduct for Research Involving Humans, December 2014. Retrieved from
http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/pdf /eng/tcps2-2014/TCPS_2_FINAL_Web.pdf
Trocme, N., Knoke, D., and Blackstock, C. (2004). Pathways to the overrepresentation of
Aboriginal Children in Canada’s child welfare system. Social Service Review, 78,
577-600.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015a). What we have learned:
Principles of truth and reconciliation. Retrieved from
http://www.trc.ca /websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Principles_
2015_05_31_web_o.pdf
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015b). Honouring the truth,
reconciling for the future: Summary of the final report of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Retrieved from http://nctr.ca
/assets/reports/Final%20 Reports/Executive_Summary_English_Web.pdf
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015c). Calls to action. Retrieved from
http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/
Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf
Turner, A. (2016). Insights on Canadian society: Living arrangements of Aboriginal
children aged 14 and under. Retrieved from http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-006-
x/ 2016001/article/14547-eng.htm
Union of B.C. Indian Chiefs. (2002). Calling forth our future: Options for the exercise of
Indigenous peoples’ authority in child welfare. Retrieved from Union of B.C.
Indian Chiefs
64
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ubcic/pages/1440/attachments/original/14
84861488/24_ubcic_ourfuture.pdf?1484861488
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs (2013). Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/news/social/protecting-rights-of-
indigenous-peoples.html
van de Sande, A. and Menzies, P. (2003). Native and mainstream parenting: A comparative
study. Native Social Work Journal, 4, 126-139.
Warne, D. (2005). Traditional perspectives on child and family health. Paediatrics and
Child Health, 10(9), 542-544.
Warne, D., & Frizzell, L. B. (2014). American Indian health policy: historical trends and
contemporary issues. American Journal of Public Health, 104(S3), S263-S267.
Warne, D., and Lajimodiere, D. (2015). American Indian health disparities: Psychosocial
influences. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9(10), 567-579.
Wesley-Esquimaux, C. C. and Smolewski, M. (2004). Historic trauma and Indigenous
healing. Ottawa: Indigenous Healing Foundation Research Series. Retrieved from
http://www.ahf.ca/downloads/historic-trauma.pdf
Whitbeck, L., Adams, G., Hoyt, D., and Chen, X. (2004). Conceptualizing and measuring
historical trauma among American Indian people. American Journal of Community
Psychology, 33, 119–30.
Wilson, D. (2016). Transforming the normalisation and intergenerational of whānau
(family) violence. Journal of Indigenous Well-being Te Mauri-Pimatisiwin, 1(2),
32–43. Retrieved from https://journalindigenouswell-being.com
65
/media/2016/12/49.41.Transforming-the-normalisation-and-intergenerational-
wh%C4%81nau-family-violence.pdf
66

Reading 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reading 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reading 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indigenous Parenting and Childrearing Muir et al.

Indigenous Parenting and Childrearing

in M. H. Bornstein (Ed.). Handbook of parenting (3rd ed.). Routledge

(Bornstein, 1991, 2012, 2015). However, there is scant information available on

Indigenous parenting, while affected by universal historical features, is subject to both

Indigenous cultural group or assimilation policies of governments.

attention, or methodical study, and often appears to be based on retrospective narratives

that Indigenous parenting is a topic riddled with contradictions and controversy.

because of colonization. Indeed, Canadian Indigenous children suffer disproportionally

Helu et al., 2008, Ministry of Social Development, 2010).

shown negligible interest in culturally sanctioned ethnotheories of Indigenous childrearing,

and Muir, under review).

average social and economic adversities. Socioeconomic contextual factors, such as

that continues to have intergenerational repercussions (Evans-Campbell, 2008; Muir and

parenting resources are profoundly affected by historical trauma. Forced parent-child

attachment relationships and the transmission of parenting in successive generations,

resulting in a transgenerational rupture in traditional Indigenous cultural knowledge and

Indigenous families and communities.

This chapter is intended as an introduction to Indigenous parenting values,

practices, and challenges. We aim to contextualize Indigenous parenting customs by 1)

diverse communities and that are understood to build resiliency in children.

Scandinavia. Finally, we will offer recommendations for future research using

decolonizing Indigenous research methodologies.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT: THE TRAUMA OF SYSTEMATIC FAMILY

SEPARATION AND PURPOSEFUL ANNIHILATION OF CULTURE

of genocide (Evans-Campbell, 2008; Warne and Lajimodiere, 2015). Historical trauma

in shaping many aspects of modern day Indigenous parenting.

Residential schools were implemented by governments in Canada, Australia (but

prime developmental periods. These schools were designed to assimilate Indigenous

Commission of Canada, 2015a). Residential schools also dismantled the relationship

Lajimodiere, 2015). Survivors of residential schools often found it difficult to become

attachment relationship (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015b).

Furthermore, the children of residential school survivors often reported traumatic

childrearing teachings, and in this case, “Grandmother” is capitalized. In the words of an

Bohr, unpublished manuscript).

The damage to culturally sanctioned parenting skills that is reported in many

dysfunctional parent-child relationships (Bombay, Matheson, and Anisman, 2009; Dorion,

2010). In addition, childhood trauma may have induced changes to bio-physiological

more vulnerable to experiencing trauma in adulthood (Bombay, Matheson, and Anisman,

environment (Levendosky and Graham-Bermann, 2000; Roberts et al., 2004). Children of

Esquimaux and Smolewski, 2004). In Inuit communities in Canada, a series of events

including a widespread Tuberculosis outbreak, and the implementation of forced

suppression, disrupted attachments, and loss of lands and self-determinism (McShane,

2016). Clearly, the disruption of parent-child attachment, subsequent lack of experience

systematically inhumane treatment of Indigenous families, which affected entire

PAST AND CURRENT DISCRIMINATORY GOVERNMENT POLICIES AND

self-image and dissociation from cultural identity shown by generations of Indigenous

intergenerational transmission, resulting in mental health and substance abuse sequelae

have been extensively discussed and studied (AANDC, 2010).

youth were recorded as being in government care (Office of Children’s Commissioner,

involved in childrearing (Pauktuutit, 2012; Wilson, 2016). A greater attention to historical

of parents and families to acknowledging how colonialism continues to impact Indigenous

families, without acknowledging or addressing the contextual social issues in Indigenous

communities, “perpetuates notions of pathology” (Coleman, Unrau, and Manyfingers,

contributed to viewing Indigenous childrearing practices through a deficit lens (Pooyak

and Gomez, 2009).

However, it would be a mistake to emphasize historical injustices exclusively as

contemporary colonial practices further perpetuate the victimization of Indigenous people,

creating challenging conditions for optimal parenting. It is important to consider whether