BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE ISRAELITE GOVERNMENT CHILD & FAMILY COURT PROTECTION SERVICES

BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE ISRAELITE GOVERNMENT CHILD & FAMILY COURT PROTECTION SERVICES
BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT & THE ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT OF JUSTICE OVER THE ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES OF CANADA
 

THE PURPOSES & ACTIVITIES THAT "BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT & THE ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT OF JUSTICE OVER THE ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES OF CANADA" INTENDS TO CARRY ON ARE:

- TO PROVIDE OUR POPULATION WITH UNLIMITED FREE ACCESS TO UNPREJUDICED & IMPARTIAL ACCESS TO HUMAN RIGHTS COURT SERVICES, HUMAN RIGHTS LAW ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION, HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION ADMINISTRATION, HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL LAWSUIT ADJUDICATION, ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION / FAMILY COURT SERVICES & HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION. THESE ACTIVITIES INVOLVE INDEPENDENTLY MANAGING OUR OWN SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION COURTS, ADJUDICATING INDEPENDENT SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION LAWSUIT COURT PROCEEDINGS, PROVIDING INFORMATION ON THE COURTS SYSTEM TO THE PUBLIC, PROVIDING / MANAGING AND MAINTAINING OUR OWN HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL COURT BUILDINGS / ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES / ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT SERVICES, PROVIDING COURTHOUSE FACILITIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION VICTIMS & THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, AS WELL AS THE COURTS CLERKS, COURT OFFICERS, JURY MEMBERS & JUDICIARY.

- TO PROVIDE OUR POPULATION WITH UNLIMITED FREE ACCESS TO FAIR & EQUITABLE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT SERVICES, HUMAN RIGHTS LAW ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION, HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION ADMINISTRATION, HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL LAWSUIT ADJUDICATION, ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION / FAMILY COURT SERVICES & HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION. THESE ACTIVITIES INVOLVE INDEPENDENTLY MANAGING OUR OWN SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION COURTS, ADJUDICATING INDEPENDENT SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION LAWSUIT COURT PROCEEDINGS, PROVIDING INFORMATION ON THE COURTS SYSTEM TO THE PUBLIC, PROVIDING / MANAGING AND MAINTAINING OUR OWN HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL COURT BUILDINGS / ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES / ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT SERVICES, PROVIDING COURTHOUSE FACILITIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION VICTIMS & THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, AS WELL AS THE COURTS CLERKS, COURT OFFICERS, JURY MEMBERS & JUDICIARY.

- TO PROVIDE OUR POPULATION WITH UNLIMITED FREE ACCESS TO UNCOMPROMISABLE & UNBIASED HUMAN RIGHTS COURT SERVICES, HUMAN RIGHTS LAW ENFORCEMENT PROTECTION, HUMAN RIGHTS LITIGATION ADMINISTRATION, HUMAN RIGHTS LAWSUIT ADJUDICATION CHILD PROTECTION / FAMILY COURT SERVICES & HUMAN RIGHTS JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION. THESE ACTIVITIES INVOLVE INDEPENDENTLY MANAGING OUR OWN SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION COURTS, ADJUDICATING INDEPENDENT SELF-GOVERNED CIVIL LITIGATION LAWSUIT COURT PROCEEDINGS, PROVIDING INFORMATION ON THE COURTS SYSTEM TO THE PUBLIC, PROVIDING / MANAGING AND MAINTAINING OUR OWN HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL LITIGATION COURT BUILDINGS, CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES, CHILD WELFARE SAFEHOUSE RESIDENCES / FAMILY COURT SERVICES, PROVIDING COURTHOUSE FACILITIES FOR HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION VICTIMS & THEIR LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES, AS WELL AS THE COURTS CLERKS, COURT OFFICERS, JURY MEMBERS & JUDICIARY.

- TO PROVIDE & MAINTAIN BUILDING FACILITIES ACROSS CANADA FOR OUR INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES, OUR STAFF, OUR CHILD PROTECTION / CHILD WELFARE WORKERS & TO ESTABLISH & MAINTAIN CHILD CUSTODY SAFEHOUSE RESIDENCES FOR CHILDREN & THEIR PARENT / PARENTS TO BE SUPERVISED & HAVE THEIR FAMILY REHABILITATED BY OUR CHILD WELFARE STAFF, WITHOUT BEING SUBJECTED TO THE CRUEL & UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT THAT CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETIES IMPOSE UPON OUR INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE FAMILIES, BY PLACING THOUSANDS OF OUR CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE UNLAWFULLY & UNNECESSARILY, USING RACIAL DISCRIMINATION & FABRICATING EVIDENCE AS KEY COMPONENTS TO DISPLACE OUR CHILDREN, DESTROY & TEAR APART OUR FAMILIES, AS THEY MALICIOUSLY VIOLATE OUR HUMAN RIGHTS, USING THEIR DEFAMATORY STATEMENTS TO ABDUCT OUR CHILDREN & FALSELY CLAIMING "CHILD SAFETY CONCERNS" WHICH ARE RARELY EVER VALIDATED OR CONFIRMED AS THE EXCUSE TO ABDUCT PERFECTLY HEALTHY, WELL CARED FOR INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE CHILDREN, WHICH MUST BE ADDRESSED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH: THE NATIONAL INDIGENOUS / NEGRO / ISRAELITE GOVERNMENT SOVEREIGNTY DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, HUMAN RIGHTS, ETHNIC NATIONALISM, NATIONAL SELF DETERMINATION & NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY, WHICH WAS FILED WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA & THE UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION / UNITED NATIONS HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATIONS COUNCIL SEVERAL TIMES SINCE FEBRUARY 24th, 2019, WHICH WE RECEIVED $0 IN SUPPORT / FUNDING FOR FROM THE CANADIAN FEDERAL / PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT'S, WHICH IS UNFAIR & UNUSUAL TREATMENT & DISCRIMINATION WITHIN ITSELF. DESPITE THAT VERY DISTURBING FACTOR, WE MUST ADDRESS OUR INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT / FAMILY COURT & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES, BY ESTABLISHING & IMPLEMENTING OUR NATIONAL INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE GOVERNMENT CONSTITUTION AS NATIONAL ALLIES OF THE FEDERAL / PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENTS OF CANADA, WHOM WE MUST LOOK TO FOR FUNDING / SUPPORT FOR THIS CORPORATE CONSTITUTION TO BE EFFICIENT & SUCCESSFUL FOR ALL INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE CHILDREN & FAMILIES NATIONWIDE.

BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT & THE ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT OF JUSTICE OVER THE ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES OF CANADA is also obligated to fairly & indiscriminately adjudicate independent court proceedings addressing applications from our population of people alleging that an organization, society or an individual representing a corporate entity has breached / violated one or more of the human rights provisions concerning civil, political or legal rights set out in the Declaration of Human Rights, The Charter of Rights or The Israelite Declaration of Human Rights and its protocols. An application can be lodged by an individual, a group of individuals.

BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT & THE ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT OF JUSTICE OVER THE ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES OF CANADA is classified an Indigenous Israelite Government judicial institution / human rights adjudication establishment that is being instituted to supervise the enforcement of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, The Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedoms, The National Indigenous / Negro / Israelite Government Declaration of Human Rights & The Convention on the Rights of the Child; which is a vitally important human rights institution for our Indigenous / Negro / Israelite Population which represents up to 90% of children placed in non-Indigenous / non-Israelite child welfare systems / foster care, while only representing less than 10% of the country's population, which proves as an injustice being addressed as part of our corporate constitution & our obligation to our population of Indigenous / Negro / Israelite Families.

FURTHERMORE, BLACK LIVES MATTER CANADA: THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE HUMAN RIGHTS COURT & THE ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT OF JUSTICE OVER THE ISRAELITE CHILD PROTECTION & CHILD WELFARE SERVICES OF CANADA IS A FEDERALIZED INSTITUTION OF "THE NATIONAL INDIGENOUS / NEGRO / ISRAELITE UNITARY GOVERNMENT SOVEREIGNTY & THE MOST HIGH SUPREME ISRAELITE COURT OF JUSTICE ADMINISTRATION" THAT HAS DECLARED INDEPENDENCE & NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY WHICH ALSO RESERVES THE ONLY EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OF AUTHORITY TO ADJUDICATE HUMAN RIGHTS CIVIL LITIGATION COURT PROCEEDINGS, FAMILY COURT PROCEEDINGS & PROVIDE CHILD WELFARE / CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES FOR OUR INDIGENOUS / NEGRO / ISRAELITE POPULATION OF PEOPLE, BESIDES OF THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA.

DEFINITIONS:

INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE PEOPLE are ethnic populations who are the original or earliest known inhabitants of The Americas (North America, Central America & South America & The Caribbean who were the 1st ethnic population to occupy The Americas after fleeing from Ancient Israel after being targeted for enslavement / torture throughout the 4 corners of the earth before & during The Trans Atlantic Slave Trade), in contrast to ethnic groups / populations that have settled, occupied or colonized the territories more recently.

INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE PEOPLE ARE A POPULATION OF INDIGENOUS, HISPANIC, NEGRO, MIXED NEGRO, MIXED HISPANIC & MIXED INDIGENOUS PEOPLE DESCENDED FROM THE 12 TRIBES OF ISRAEL WHO HAVE BEEN SCATTERED / ENSLAVED THROUGHOUT THE FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH BEFORE & DURING THE TRANS ATLANTIC SLAVE TRADE (SPECIFICALLY BETWEEN THE YEARS OF 930 BCE - 1975 AD)".

HUMAN RIGHTS COURT ensures that individuals & organizations respect the rights and guarantees set out in the Universal Human Rights Constitution's are protected & reinforced.

HUMAN RIGHTS COURTS in Canada are also obligated to fairly & indiscriminately adjudicate independent court proceedings addressing applications from our population of people alleging that an organization, society or an individual representing a corporate entity has breached / violated one or more of the human rights provisions concerning civil, political or legal rights set out in the Declaration of Human Rights, The Charter of Rights & Freedoms and The Israelite Declaration of Human Rights and its protocols. An application can be lodged by an individual, a group of individuals.

FAMILY COURT is a court of law that handles cases involving domestic issues such as child custody, family separation, etc,...

FAMILY COURT has services available for individuals dealing with family law issues. ... The purpose of Family Court is to provide the population with access to the family law legal system's adjudication process.

FAMILY COURT has jurisdiction over child protection, child adoption, child custody, child access, child support, child welfare and parental / family support adjudication / court processes.

CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES provide protection for children who are at risk of, or are experiencing neglect, physical, sexual, or emotional abuse. The focus is on the safety of the child and support for parents to strengthen families and promote safe nurturing homes for children.

CHILD PROTECTION is the protection of children from violence, exploitation, abuse and neglect. ... At the level of prevention, the aim of child protection services includes supporting and strengthening families to reduce social exclusion, and to lower the risk of separation, violence and exploitation.

CHILD PROTECTION is the protection of children from violence, exploitation, abuse and neglect. Article 19 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provides for the protection of children in and out of the home. Child protection systems are a set of usually government-run / government-approved CHILD WELFARE SERVICES.

CHILD WELFARE is a term used to describe a set of government and private services designed to protect children and encourage family stability. The main aim of these services is to safeguard children from abuse and neglect.

THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM is a group of public and private Israelite Government services that are focused on ensuring that all of our Indigenous Israelite children live in safe, permanent and stable environments that encourage family support, family stability, cultural education & child / family protection from the racial targeting of unlawful children's aid abduction societies who violate human rights using "child safety concerns" as a malicious excuse to abduct our Indigenous / Negro / Israelite Children to justify the continuation of their multi-million government funding programs.What is wrong with the child welfare system in Canada?When families do face child care issues, the Canadian child welfare system doesn't do enough to protect children & families. The system places undue emphasis on the child protection agencies rights, as compared & in contrast to children's & families human rights & the best interests of the child and the child's family, which undermines the overwhelming goal of “family preservation”, with adoption & foster care to be considered only as a "last resort".

The overall aim of THE INDIGENOUS ISRAELITE FAMILY COURT & CHILD PROTECTION / CHILD WELFARE SYSTEM is to ensure our children are safe, to prevent them from suffering harm / further harm; to promote the child's welfare, health development / cultural & spiritual development & to provide support and human rights resources to the family and other biological family members to protect and promote the welfare & rights of their children & their families.CHILD WELFARE SYSTEMS typically receive and investigate reports of possible child abuse and neglect; provide services to families that need assistance in the category of child care / child welfare.

CHILDREN'S RIGHTS include the right to health, education, family life (which includes family care, family culture & family traditions), recreation, an adequate standard of living and to be protected from abuse, harm or neglect. ... Non-discrimination means that all children have the same right to develop their potential in all situations and at all times & not to be subjected to unfair, unjust, cruel or unusual punishment by child protection agencies by being unjustifiably displaced in a complete strangers home unsupervised, placed at risk for unknown abuses in secret locations unknown to their biological parents & family & disconnected from their family with no family rehabilitation / reconciliation considered, which is an  unjust & unacceptable well known practice of child protection agencies like The Children's Aid Societies of Ontario & throughout North America.

(CFSA).5 In 2013, the 46 child welfare agencies in Ontario received $1.46 billion in funding from the Ontario government.6 A report by Toronto Children’s Aid Society indicated that 41% of the children in the care of their agency were Black, while Black children made up only 8% of the city’s population.7 The report stated that the majority of the children in care were of Jamaican heritage.8Peel Children’s Aid Society reports that 22% of the children in the care of their agency are Black, with another 19% reporting mixed race heritage.9 Black people represent 9% of the Peel Region population.10 As well, Black children are kept in care longer in comparison to other groups.11For many, the over-representation of Black and Aboriginal children in care is attributed to systemic and structural oppressions of colonialism and racism.12
Experts contend that the child welfare system must be located and interrogated within the wider context of white supremacy, colonialism and anti-Black racism that has underpinned the formation of the post–war welfare state.13 This view, however, is contested by others who assert that there is no compelling evidence that race significantly impacts child welfare decision-making.14A 2016Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies (OACAS) report titled “One Vision, One Voice” highlighted that anti-Black racism is a cause of the over-representation of Black children in care of child welfare authorities.15 This report was based on a series of public consultations held in several cities across Ontario, which were facilitated by the OACAS. In this article, we focus on how anti-Black racism and white supremacy are embodied or manifested in tangible or visible forms in the child welfare system. Given the often heart-wrenching narratives of suffering experienced by Black children and families involved with child welfare services, we ask the following two guiding questions: 1) how are colonialism, anti-Black racism and white supremacy embodied by the child welfare system? And, 2) how can the extreme suffering experienced by many Black families involved with the child welfare system be understood? This schema of embodiment is necessary to deconstruct how anti-Black racism, colonialism, and white supremacy are manifested in the day-to-day policies and practices of child welfare. To explicate this embodiment, we will discuss three inter-related factors: 1) the historical rise of the welfare state, 2) anti-Black racism, and 3) bio-power and governmentality. These three factors not only proffer insights into how white supremacy, anti-Black racism, and colonialism are embodied in child welfare, but also an interrogation into how well-intentioned social workers can be implicated in a Black family’s intense suffering. We conclude the article by examining narratives of suffering experienced by Black families involved with child welfare to show how bio-power and governmentality are embodied in these encounters. Reflecting on the suffering experienced by Black mothers and fathers involved with the child welfare system, we elucidate how these experiences are a form of social suffering. Rylko-Bauer & Farmer define social suffering as the collective experiences of structural violence and the resulting pain it inflicts among classes of people.16 This structural violence stems from social structures such as patriarchy, slavery, colonialism, neo-liberalism, poverty, and discrimination based on race, gender, sexual orientation, and migrant/refugee status, etc. Rylko-Bauer et al. argue that social suffering “captures the lived experience of distress and injustice” while revealing how the pain, humiliation, loss, grief, anger, sadness, fear, and despair people experience are often inextricably linked to larger socio-political, economic, cultural, and

historical forces.17 Kleinman, Das, and Lock understand social suffering as resulting from the impact that political, economic, social, and institutional power have on people and how these social forces configure responses to systemic social problems.18 Echoing the feminist clarion call that the personal is political, Darby notes that social suffering is a social experience whereby personal challenges of a psychological or medical nature are closely linked to larger structural factors.19 Social suffering challenges dominant discourses within social, health, and policy realms that tend to locate social problems as attributable to individual and/or family deficits.20This understanding of social suffering, we assert, is important for deconstructing the emotional and psychological impact that child welfare encounters have on Black families. Anti-Black racism is a form of structural violence. Anti-Black racism refers to a virulent form of racism that is directed against Black people and their resistance to such oppressions.21Anti-Black racism is rooted in slavery, which existed in Canada for three centuries.22 White supremacy is another form of structural violence. According to Thobani, white supremacy refers to the policies and practices in Canadian settler society, which exalts white people as patriotic national subjects, while devaluing racial “Others” as threats to the security and prosperity of the nation.23 The concept of white supremacy is rooted in the history of modernity and European colonialism.24
THE EMERGENCE OF THE WELFARE STATE AND ITS IMPACT ON BLACK FAMILIES
In this section, we discuss the rise of the welfare system and its impact on Black families. To understand the suffering experienced by many Black families involved with Children’s Aid Societies (CAS) requires comprehending how the child welfare system in Ontario is a central component of the colonial project. Michael Hart defines colonialism as “a worldview and processes that embrace dominion, self-righteousness and greed, and affects all levels of Indigenous peoples’ lives... including their spiritual practices, emotional well-being, physical health and knowledge.”25 Coulthard purports the following: a colonial relationship can be defined as one characterized by domination; that is, it is a relationship where power—in this case, interrelated discursive and non-discursive facets of economic, gendered, racial, and state power—has been structured into a relatively secure or sedimented set of hierarchical social relations that continue to facilitate the dispossession of Indigenous peoples of their land and self-determining authority.26Colonialism was a central feature of the modern period beginning in the 1400s.27 During modernity, the concept of race was drawn upon to legitimize the exploitation, domination, and annihilation of non-Western people, while simultaneously constructing the white race as superior to all others.28According to Foucault, during modernity,“racism took shape’” to include“a whole politics of settlement (peuplement), family, marriage, education, social hiercharization, and property, accompanied by a long series of permanent interventions at the level of the body, conduct, health, and everyday life” and to justify “the mythical concern with protecting the purity of blood and ensuring the triumph of the race.”29 The sway of scientific racism during the Enlightenment period, dovetailed with white settler nationalism in the creation of state control over sexuality in the form of anti-miscegenation laws in Canada and the United States of America (US).30 While modern nation-building projects created an incessant demand for cheap labour, which were routinely fulfilled by racialized immigrants, the presence of non-whites fuelled fears of inter-racial sexuality.31 Anti-miscegenation laws, moreover, were aimed at curtailing the fertility of racialized women, who were socially constructed as licentious, hyper-sexualized, and primitive.32The racism that underpinned anti-miscegenation laws operated to police desire, marriages, and families through what Foucault called bio-power, which refers to the operations of power on individual bodies in order to “optimize its capabilities, efficiency, usefulness, and docility”.33 The rise of bio-power, in this way, is inseparable from the exigencies of white supremacy and settler colonialism that constituted the emergence of the welfare state. Correspondingly, the contemporary child protection system, which is a component of the welfare state, has its roots in a bio-power, or what Foucault refers to as a disciplinary power that measures, monitors, surveilles, polices, and punishes racialized others, who constituted threats to the white race.
Concerns have grown over the influx of Black children into Ontario's child welfare systems. There are approximately 539,205 (8% of the population) Black individuals living in Ontario, yet Black children make up 41% of the children in the care of the Children's Aid Society of Toronto (Polanyi et al., 2014).

For decades, Indigenous, Black and other racialized families and communities have raised the alarm that their children are over-represented in the child welfare system. Although Indigenous and racialized children’s pathways through the system are quite different, Ontario-based research shows that racial disparities – that is, differences between racial groups at decision-making points in a service – do exist. The number of Indigenous children in care is staggering, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) has called the situation a “growing crisis.”

The issues that give rise to the over-representation of Indigenous and Black children in the child welfare system are complex and multi-faceted. For example, low income, which is one of the inter-generational effects of colonialism, slavery and racism in society, is a major driver of child welfare involvement for Indigenous and Black children. Many Indigenous, Black and other racialized families, communities, advocates and others are also concerned that systemic racial discrimination in the child welfare system plays a significant role.
The OHRC’s inquiry

To respond to these concerns, in 2016 the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) launched a public interest inquiry to examine the involvement of Indigenous and racialized children and youth in the child welfare system. We used our powers under s. 31 of the Ontario Human Rights Code to request information from children’s aid societies (CASs) on their race-based data collection practices and how they track children and families receiving their services.

The goal was to examine whether Indigenous and Black children are over-represented at CASs, particularly in admissions into care. We were concerned because racial disproportionality (the over- or under-representation of certain racial groups in a service relative to their proportion in the general population) and racial disparity may be indicators of systemic racial discrimination. This report discusses the results of this analysis, and describes the human rights-based data collection practices CASs use.
What we found

Despite the limitations of the race-based data the OHRC received from mainstream CASs, the OHRC observed disproportionately high incidences of Indigenous and Black children in admissions into care at many of these agencies across the province. Although the racial disproportionality data presented in this report is not conclusive of discrimination by CASs, it is a starting point for CASs and the government to look critically at racial inequality in the sector.

When considered along with the long-standing issues people in Indigenous and Black communities have raised about discrimination in the child welfare sector, the disproportionalities we found raise serious concerns for CASs. CASs should act on these findings by investigating whether their structures, policies, processes, decision-making practices and organizational cultures may adversely affect Indigenous and Black families, and potentially violate the Ontario Human Rights Code.

Where notable racial disparities or disproportionalities exist in quantitative data collected by CASs, they should:

  • Acknowledge these disparities/disproportionalities and their potential impact on the trust and confidence of affected communities in the organization
  • Acknowledge that these disparities/disproportionalities raise serious concerns that the CAS should proactively and transparently investigate.
    This investigation should:

    • Canvass and reflect the perspectives and experiences of affected communities
    • Reflect existing relevant social science evidence
    • Attempt to isolate possible source(s) of the disparities/disproportionalities
    • Communicate the findings with affected communities to further understand their concerns
    • Set out next steps, with associated measures of success and monitoring, and
    • Report in a public and transparent way on the findings and next steps.

To this end, the OHRC has made a series of recommendations for CASs, government and other parties (see Section 8).

Here are some specific conclusions from the inquiry:

  • Indigenous children were over-represented in admissions into care at 93% of agencies we looked at (25 of 27), with many CASs showing extreme levels of disproportionality. Overall, the proportion of Indigenous children admitted into care was 2.6 times higher than their proportion in the child population. These figures likely underestimate the proportions of Indigenous children admitted into care, in part because the OHRC’s sample only included non-Indigenous (mainstream) CASs.
  • Black children were over-represented in admissions into care at 30% of agencies (8 of 27). Overall, the proportion of Black children admitted into care was 2.2 times higher than their proportion in the child population.
  • In contrast, at more than half of the 27 CASs, White children were under-represented among children admitted into care (15 of 27 agencies or 56%).
  • Race-based data collection processes and practices are a patchwork across the sector. We looked at 38 mainstream CASs’ data collection practices. These CASs’ human rights-based (particularly race-based) data collection practices are widely inconsistent with each other and vary even within many individual agencies.
  • More than 40% of CASs did not know the racial backgrounds or Indigenous identities of more than one in five children served by their agency, when considering referrals, cases opened for investigation, and admissions of children into care. Four agencies did not know the racial backgrounds or Indigenous identities of over half the children placed into care.
  • For most CASs, these gaps and inconsistences make it statistically difficult to assess if racial disparities exist across different service decisions (such as placing children into care), which makes it difficult to assess whether systemic racial discrimination may be happening.
  • The best and most complete data is collected by agencies that:
    • Have a deliberate, holistic approach to data collection grounded in trying to understand the needs of the marginalized communitiesthey serve
    • Are concerned about racial disproportionality and disparities
    • Have dedicated the resources to do these analyses, and
    • Have trained their staff.

The OHRC learned that the government is planning to introduce a directive requiring CASs to begin to systematically collect human rights-based data. As part of its mandate to address systemic discrimination, Ontario’s Anti-Racism Directorate is also developing standards and guidelines on collecting race-based data. These initiatives are an important step forward, but to be effective, they must be put into action. To ensure compliance and continuity over time, CASs should be required by law to collect human rights-based data, including race-based data.

The Ontario Human Rights Code aims to create “a climate of understanding and mutual respect for the dignity and worth of each person so that each person feels a part of the community and able to contribute fully to the development and well-being of the community and the Province.” Whether because of systemic discrimination in the child welfare system or broader social exclusion, the over-representation of Black and Indigenous children in admissions into care stands in the way of achieving this vision of society. Being admitted into care comes with far-reaching consequences that can have a negative impact on children’s future ability to thrive.

Identifying and addressing potential systemic racial discrimination in the child welfare sector is one part of the picture. The broader social and economic issues that contribute to the over-representation of Indigenous and Black children in child welfare also need to be addressed. These issues require a multi-pronged response from government, CASs and civil society to create truly equitable outcomes for Indigenous and racialized children and families.

1. Introduction

When child welfare authorities remove children from their caregivers because of concerns about abuse or neglect, it can be traumatic and tragic for everyone involved – children, their families and even their communities. Being admitted into care comes with far-reaching consequences that can have a negative impact on children’s future ability to thrive. It is an unfortunate reality that some children need to be placed in care to keep them safe. But too often, for First Nations, Métis, Inuit, Black[1] and other racialized families, being involved with the child welfare system and having a child removed is fraught with concerns that the system is not meeting their or their children’s needs, is harmful, and may be discriminatory.

For decades, Indigenous, Black and other racialized families and communities have raised the alarm that their children are over-represented in the child welfare system and have expressed a resulting lack of trust in mainstream child welfare services.[2] More recently, different reports and studies have documented this over-representation. Although Indigenous and racialized children’s pathways through the child welfare system are quite different, Ontario-based research shows that racial disparities – that is, differences between racial groups at decision-making points in a service – do exist. Indigenous, Black, Latin American and West Asian[3] children are more likely to be the subject of maltreatment-related investigations than White children.[4] For Indigenous and Black children, these disparities continue into other service decisions,[5] including the decision to place children into care.[6]

The number of Indigenous children in care is staggering, and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) has called the situation a “growing crisis.”[7] In 2016, over half of children (52.2%) under age 15 in foster care in Canada were Indigenous, despite Indigenous children only accounting for 7.7% of the child population.[8] There are more Indigenous children in care today than there were in residential schools at the height of their use.[9]

The issues that give rise to the over-representation of Indigenous and Black children in the child welfare system are multi-faceted. For example, low income, which is one of the inter-generational effects of colonialism, slavery and racism in society,[10] is strongly associated with caregiver and household risk factors for children.[11] In Ontario, children who are the subject of a child welfare investigation whose families run out of money for food, housing or utilities face approximately double the odds of being placed into care.[12] Poverty and race intersect. Research supports that racial disparities exist between White children living in poverty and Indigenous and racialized children living in poverty with respect to child welfare involvement.[13]

Many Indigenous, Black and other racialized families, communities, advocates and others are also concerned that systemic racial discrimination in the child welfare system plays a significant role. In our 2016 consultation on racial profiling, the OHRC heard from many Indigenous and Black participants about troubling experiences and perceptions of systemic racial discrimination in the child welfare system.[14] For example, a midwife working in hospitals said:

I work as a midwife, primarily with Aboriginal women, and have lost track of how many racist assumptions and mistreatments I've observed based on race. For example…calling social workers or child protection agencies because parents are young and native – massive profiling in the selection of who has that involvement. Then, once that involvement starts, Aboriginal women are much more likely to have their babies removed for much more dubious reasons.[15]

As well, given the grave concerns about racial disproportionality in child welfare, the OHRC is concerned that Indigenous, Black and other racialized children may not equally enjoy the rights provided for under international human rights standards. In 1991, Canada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Among other rights, this treaty lays out the rights of children to not be separated from their parents against their will, unless it is in children’s best interests.[16] Even where this separation occurs, due regard must be paid to children’s ethnic, religious, cultural and linguistic backgrounds when considering where to place them.[17] Further, States Parties (countries that have ratified or signed their acceptance to the treaty) must take measures to protect children from abuse and neglect. These measures should include creating social programs that provide the necessary support for children and caregivers.[18]

In December 2015, as part of its 94 Calls to Action, the TRC called on governments to commit to changing the child welfare system to reduce the number of Indigenous children in care.[19] These Calls to Action reflect the principles set out in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.[20] The OHRC responded to these Calls to Action, and to repeated calls from people in Black communities, by committing to use its mandate to examine the over-representation of Indigenous and racialized children and youth in Ontario’s child welfare system.

Collecting disaggregated data based on race or Indigenous identity is often the first step in understanding if racial disparities exist and if they indicate systemic racial discrimination in an organization or sector.[21] This is why the OHRC decided to use our inquiry powers under the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code)[22] to ask for data and examine racial disproportionality in the child welfare system in Ontario, particularly in admissions into care. This data creates a starting point for the OHRC to raise awareness about these issues. The goals of the inquiry were to:

  • Learn more about human rights-based data collection practices that CASs use and the government’s role in supporting these practices
  • Examine whether Indigenous and Black children and youth are over-represented among children admitted into care at individual CASs, relative to their representation in the population
  • Examine research and current initiatives related to the over-representation of Indigenous and Black children in the child welfare system
  • Make recommendations for change.
This article focuses on how colonialism, anti-Black racism and white supremacy are embodied by Ontario’s child welfare system in relation to narratives of suffering experienced by Black families involved with this sector. We discuss how these experiences are an embodiment of the Foucauldian concepts of bio-power and governmentality. Understanding this embodiment is crucial for deconstructing how anti-Black racism, colonialism, and white supremacy are manifested in the day-to-day policies and practices of child welfare. To explicate these policies and practices we discuss three inter-related factors: 1) the historical rise of the welfare state, 2) anti-Black racism, and 3) bio-power and governmentality. CHILDREN FROM MARGINALIZED COMMUNITIES continue to be over-represented in the child welfare system. The 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) reveals that almost half of all the children (14,200) under the age of 14 in foster care in Canada are Aboriginal.1 While Aboriginal children make up only 7% of all children in Canada, they represent 48% of all children in foster care.2 Presently, there are three times as many Aboriginal children in care as compared to the figure at the height of the Indian Residential Schools.3Black children are also over-represented in the child welfare system.4 Child welfare agencies in Ontario are mandated to protect children under the Child and Family Services Act.