Home Page
  • Home / Welcome Page
  • Biographical Note
  • Wall of Quick Links . . .
  • Only Podcasts . . .
  • Events and Appearances
  • Black Face Blogging
    • Black Face Blog Index
    • Subscribe
  • Academic Publications
  • Community Publications
  • Book Review Publications
  • Community Resources
    • Indigenous Knowledge Protection Act
    • Follow the Turtle
    • Ally Bill of Responsibilities
    • My Wampum Bundle
    • Truth that Wampum Tells
    • Genocide: A Personal Manifesto
    • Anishinaabeg Thinking
    • Canadians Need to Know
    • Cupcake Feminism
    • Knowledge is Wholistic
    • The Metaphoric Turtle
    • Oh Canada
    • Treaty Federal Order
  • Some of My Art
  • Indigenous Women & Girls with Disabilities
  • Algonquin 101
  • Algonquin 201
  • Contact Information

Deplorable Aboriginal Affairs Paternity Policy Targets Mothers and Children

5/30/2013

3 Comments

 
Picture
While usually as a measure to assure reader clarity I write in a narrative style with distinct sentences and paragraphs, in this blog I write in clear, concise, and distinct, yet related, bullets.  I opt to use this style of writing here because I am addressing issues of legislation and policy which requires the need for me to be more precise with my word choice.

With that explained, many people do not know or understand that since 1985 Canada has been eliminating its treaty responsibilities through Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada’s unstated paternity policy – a policy that directly targets mothers and their babies.  Yes, this is correct, Canada is now targeting mothers and babies.  Deplorable I know.  Here are the quick facts:
  • Status registration with Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada (AANDC) is the mechanism that provides entitlement to treaty rights that include annuity payments, health care, dental care, vision care, education, and hunting, fishing, and gathering rights.
  • Status registration with AANDC is also the mechanism that in most First Nations provides for band membership, First Nation citizenship, and the right to live in First Nations communities.
  • Status registration and treaty rights are critical for a healthy identity production, access to one’s culture, and thus a critical factor in one’s ability to achieve mino-bimadiziwin (the good life).
  • Status registration places individuals in a more favourable location in terms of contemporary land claims and self-government negotiations processes and thus in terms of the benefits of final agreements.
  • Through the 1985 amendment to the Indian Act, provisions that once protected children born out-of-wedlock, and consequently children born of unknown, unreported, unnamed, unacknowledged, unestablished, unrecognized, and unstated paternity, were removed.
  • Through the 1985 amendment, the Indian Act is now silent on the matter of children born out-of-wedlock, and children born of unknown, unreported, unnamed, unacknowledged, unestablished, unrecognized, and unstated paternity.
  • In 1985 AANDC – then the department of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (INAC) – established an unstated paternity policy that addresses all unknown, unreported, unnamed, unacknowledged, unestablished, unrecognized, and unstated paternity under its application process.
  • AANDC’s unstated paternity policy applies a negative presumption of paternity to these situations of birth – meaning in processing applications for status registration the Registrar assumes situations where a father’s signature is lacking on a child’s birth certificate as a non-Indian person as defined by the Indian Act.
  • ANNDC’s unstated paternity policy assumption is applied differently to people who have had status entitlement disrupted due to sex discrimination, than it is applied to people who have not had status entitlement disrupted.
  • ANNDC’s unstated paternity policy assumption is applied retroactively to families that have had status entitlement disrupted due to sex discrimination, yet it only applies to births after 1985 to families that have not had status entitlement disrupted.
  • Status registration is now stratified in two sections: 6(1) and 6(2).
  • Mothers of 6(1) status registration can pass on registration to their children in their own right.
  • Mothers of 6(2) status registration cannot pass on registration to their children in their own right.

Picture
  • During the period of 1985-1999, as many as 37,300 children of unstated paternity were born to mothers registered under section 6(1).
  • During the period of 1985-1999, as many as 13,000 children of unstated paternity were born to mothers registered under section 6(2).
  • Due to AANDC’s unstated paternity policy, children born to 6(1) mothers are entitled to the lesser form of status registration which prevents these children from passing on treaty rights to their children in their own right.
  • Due to AANDC’s unstated paternity policy, children born to 6(2) mothers are not entitled to their treaty rights.
  • The rates of unstated paternity for mothers registered under 6(1) are: under the age of 15 years 45%, aged 15-19 years 30%, aged 20-24 years 19%, aged 30-34 years 12%.
  • It is not unreasonable to assume that similar rates would apply to mothers registered under section 6(2).
  • Many mothers are victims of sexualized violence such as prostitution, sexual slavery, rape, and gang rape which prevents them from being able to name fathers.
  • Many mothers are victims of sexualized violence such as physical abuse and incest which prevents them from naming fathers.
  • Many mothers are victims of men who take advantage of their standing in society and communities for sexual gain which prevents them from naming fathers.
  • In some situations mothers do not know who a father is.
  • Many fathers refuse to take responsibility for paternity due to such matters as the desire and/or need to avoid child support payments and the need to preserve a previous relationship.
  • A father’s signature is required on all birth certificates regardless of marital status for paternity to be factored into AANDC’s process of determining status registration for all new applications.
  • AANDC’s unstated paternity policy applies to all births that predate 1985.  This includes situations where a grandfather or great-grandfather is unrecognized, unacknowledged, un-established, un-reported, unnamed, or unknown.

Lynn Gehl is an Algonquin Anishinaabe-kwe from the Ottawa River Valley.  She has a section 15 Charter and section 35 Constitutional challenge regarding the continued sex discrimination in The Indian Act,  is an outspoken critic of the Ontario Algonquin land claims and self-government process, and she recently published a book titled Anishinaabeg Stories: Featuring Petroglyphs, Petrographs, and Wampum Belts.  You can reach her at lynngehl@gmail.com and see more of her work at www.lynngehl.com.

Lynn Gehl is not a lawyer.  Seek legal advice if required.

Please comment on, like, and share this Black Face blog.
3 Comments
Randall
5/30/2013 08:28:36 am

Here is another scenario related to AANDC’s unstated paternity policy: the cruel irony of government treatment of aboriginal war veterans was that they were 'enfranchised' meaning they and their immediate family lost their status. Great way to reward them for their service and sacrifice, eh?

Even though status was restored with changes to the Indian Act in 1985 (Bill C-31), the children were designated to have 6(2) status, not 6(1) as was the case with both parents.

This is another example in the long list of betrayals perpetrated by government that cries out for a constitutional challenge.

Reply
Lynn Gehl
5/31/2013 08:00:43 am

Thank you Randal for reminding us of this issue. Lynn

Reply
Eric
6/8/2013 09:10:39 pm

Randall - Good point. I don`t think the general public is aware of these things. I will point out that the only way to eliminate the discrimination in the registration provisions is simple. All descendants of an Indian born prior to Bill C31 (1985, April) Should be registered under the applicable section of 6(1).

And... your right - I think any court would rule these discriminitory rules in violation of the Constitution Act.

The Exploratory Process that was undertaken after the Mcivor case was rules gives some very good registration suggestions.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

Picture
copyright Lynn Gehl
www.lynngehl.com