Elders and Indigenous Healing in the Correctional Service of Canada: a Story of Relational Dissonance, Sacred Doughnuts, and Drive-Thru Expectations
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ELDERS AND INDIGENOUS HEALING IN THE CORRECTIONAL SERVICE OF CANADA: A STORY OF RELATIONAL DISSONANCE, SACRED DOUGHNUTS, AND DRIVE-THRU EXPECTATIONS A Dissertation Submitted to the Committee on Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Arts and Science TRENT UNIVERSITY Peterborough, Ontario, Canada © Copyright Robin Quantick, 2017 Indigenous Studies PhD Program September 2017 Abstract In our communities, we are continually challenged to reflect on effective responses to the people and events that put us at risk. This study is an examination of two distinctly different world-view responses: the colonial, dominant culture and the Indigenous world view. The retributive understanding of the dominant culture applies assumptions about the nature of the world that are vested in colonial, paternal, and punitive processes aimed to extract compliance as a means of deterrence. Conversely, the consensual precepts of Indigenous world view are rooted in community-based practices that require a process of collaboration and cooperation to create integrated relationships that glean responsibility. This study brings light to bear on the ongoing relational dissonance that exists between the following: the disproportionate representation of men and women of Aboriginal descent held under federal warrant in Canada; the legislated mandate contained within the Canadian Corrections and Conditional Release Act that places successful community reintegration as a primary objective for the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC); and the role, place, and function of Elders who work in CSC reception centres, healing programs, and Pathways Initiatives. This study explores the variables, assumptions, and differing world-views that contribute to the disproportionate representation of incarcerated adults of Aboriginal descent and the challenges that impede successful community reintegration. In order to effectively examine and make sense of the relational dissonance that exists between correctional theory and institutional practice, the research is driven by a central question: ii What is the role, place, and function of Elders in the delivery of Indigenous healing programs within Canadian federal prisons? The outcome of this work reveals practices of decolonizing justice and healing that can move assumptions and challenge paternal understanding. It is an approach that has the capacity to peel away relational dissonance, thus allowing space for public policy that sustains consensual understandings of community. iii RESEARCHER (to an Elder): Is there something I should know? ELDER: Never arrive without the sacred doughnuts! When Elders bring participants together in a healing program, they begin by gathering the group in a circle. After a smudging ceremony, there is often a teaching; there is always participant sharing. In the prison setting, the sharing can be raw. In my experience, it is often laced with dark humour and, from time to time, moments of honesty that are both coarse and disturbing. The eventual coffee break infuses a sense of normalcy—as if the prison program could be a community gathering at a friendship centre or a community hall. The coffee makes space for individual exchanges to occur between participants and with the Elder. In these individual dialogues there are moments of epiphany . they arrive unexpectedly and in their own good time. On special occasions, there are doughnuts . iv Elders are at the centre of any [Indigenous] healing process, be it through ceremony, teaching or counselling. They are an invaluable resource. A more thorough investigation of Elders services in federal institutions and Healing Lodges and factors that may inhibit their capacity to meet the needs of Aboriginal offenders is warranted. (Sapers, 2012 p. 22) v Acknowledgements This dissertation is the product of a community of people who shared and trusted, challenged and provoked . It is not the work of one person. This community includes my committee, Dr. Chris Furgal and Dr. Nicole Bell, who shared their insight and wisdom. Elder Doug Williams and Elder Harvey McCue who agreed to be readers, scrutinizing the work to ensure and preserve the safety and security of the Elders who participated in this research endeavor. This community also includes Teri-Ann McDonald whose good-humour and precise editing skills proved to be indispensible. To my supervisor, Dr. Deborah Berrill, special acknowledgement: she read the material more times than I can count . she persevered and coaxed . she respected my instincts and she accepted my eccentricities. More than anything she knew how to be critical when it was the last thing I wanted to hear. Deborah is the teacher I aspire to be!! To the Elders who participated in this study: without them this would work not have happened! They trusted me with their words and their experiences . I hope I have done justice to the work they do. This community also includes two people who are no longer with us, Sandi Warren and Lorne Ellingson, who lived and led by example . and several others who are here and leading still . Brenda Maracle-O’Toole, Dr. Lynne Davis, and Professor David Newhouse. They come to work everyday and they carry their share of the water and then a little bit more so that the rest of us have the time and space to breathe a little vi easier. For me, they exemplify the selfless commitment that is required to do the work of a community. I am grateful they are among my teachers. I also need to acknowledge two friends of long standing; Victor McCoy and Robert Boucher. Victor holds the record as the longest serving ALO in CSC history. For over 30 years he poked and prodded and told really bad jokes. He made a difference, one guy at a time! Robert Boucher is unique in the world and pivotal in this work: he walked away from the CSC with his family and his optimism intact, which is no small accomplishment! Throughout this process he was my fairness barometer: When I was concerned I was harsh or arbitrary, he provided much needed perspective. Each of these men shared and listened, and they reflected back . for this I am very grateful. Finally, I want to acknowledge my family for their unconditional support. My children, Sarah, Jessica, and Joshua asked questions and feigned interest when regular people would have left the room and/or changed the subject. They are a source of joy and amazement that never ends. Most importantly I want to thank my best friend, my wife, the love of my life, Laurie. In all of this work she never asked . are you sure about this? I am grateful for the support and the trust you have extended to me. vii Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. ii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ................................................................................................................. xiii List of Tables .................................................................................................................. xiv Researcher as Positioned Subject .................................................................................. xv Chapter One: Introduction .............................................................................................. 1 Purpose......................................................................................................................... 1 Rationale for the Research Question......................................................................... 2 Mandate and Power................................................................................................. 3 Disproportionate Representation ............................................................................ 4 Policy Development ................................................................................................ 5 Consensual Reconnection ....................................................................................... 6 Contextualization of the Issue .................................................................................... 7 Practical Context ..................................................................................................... 7 Academic/Theoretical Context ............................................................................... 9 Three Justice Paradigms .......................................................................................... 10 Retributive............................................................................................................. 11 Restorative ............................................................................................................ 12 Indigenous ............................................................................................................. 12 Summary of Justice Paradigms ............................................................................. 13 Concepts ..................................................................................................................... 14 Reparative Justice ................................................................................................. 15 Restitution ............................................................................................................. 15 Colonization .........................................................................................................