Deaths of Aboriginal Children

[Borg]

Whiteman is bad - whiteman gives - whitmen takes - indian always suffers.

One never knows what or who to believe any more.

Too much rhetoric and too many people filling their own agenda's with money, power and so on.

In the end if things are to improve, the indian needs to take some personal responsibility.

Seems to me their own leaders are doing quite well.

To date there may be some who are taking the responsibility - however all I seem to read about is how tough it is on the reserve, how bad the gangs are, how poor the people are, how badly they have been treated, how rotten the white guy is on an overall basis. I always think to myself - if you do not like your circumstance - change it!

I am not reading or hearing a lot about how the indian is taking control of the situations on the reserve, how the indian is making good use of grant monies to build a life for his/her people or how there is a move afoot to improve anything.

I am quite tired of it all. After all this is all because some people - long before I was born - are supposed to have done some bad things to other people who are also long dead. All well within the rule of law and acceptance in THAT day. It would not and could not happen today - and I am fine with that. But to use excuses from more than 100 years ago on the whole - seems suspect to me.

I suppose you could look at various nations around the world and compare the same thing - once at war with each other and now trading partners.

Time for the indian to sort out their own house first - then make the small steps forward in the journey to life in this world - the same world they have been shutting out for generations.

I am not to blame for their problems and I do not believe any other person alive today and living on the economy is to blame - best of my knowledge no one in my family has ever done anything to insult or harm an indian - yet more than a couple of times I have had family harmed by the noble savage - most notably - once when stopping to help at a roll over just outside Calgary.

Imagine - 60+ year old man - my father - stopping to help and being beat up by a couple of young men claiming to have been run off the road by a truck - yet Dad was driving a VW Jetta.

As a whole I think the indian needs to look in the mirror and see what is transpiring - then straighten up his own mess. If and when that happens I might have some small sympathy for their so called "plight". Otherwise the status quo is fine with me. I am busy enough trying to support my own family and pay my own bills and keep my own employees happy and keep some small parts of the familiy businesses running smoothly.

I have no time or truck for those who will not take responsibility for their actions or their plight.

Perhaps it is time others sent this message to the indian.

Borg

[myata]

We have many threads on Indian Affairs. I started this thread because I wondered about aboriginal kids. Why do they die?

A simple answer to this, is because these are different societies; they aren't the same as ours (and ours wasn't always the same as now - look several generations back for example); it's unfortunate and sad, but that's the way things are in some (many?) third world societies... just the fact that some are geographically located within our borders doesn't change them one bit; it takes time and pain, and patience, getting there;

[eyeball]

A simple answer to this, is because these are different societies; they aren't the same as ours (and ours wasn't always the same as now - look several generations back for example); it's unfortunate and sad, but that's the way things are in some (many?) third world societies... just the fact that some are geographically located within our borders doesn't change them one bit; it takes time and pain, and patience, getting there;

Why should anyone expect it will take any less time, pain and patience to get back? These folks are just getting started on that journey. You're willing to look back several generations for examples so looking several generations forward towards a conclusion shouldn't be too much of a stretch, as unfortunate and sad as that prospect may be.

Edited April 19, 2008 by eyeball

[WIP]

Whiteman is bad - whiteman gives - whitmen takes - indian always suffers.

One never knows what or who to believe any more.

Too much rhetoric and too many people filling their own agenda's with money, power and so on.

In the end if things are to improve, the indian needs to take some personal responsibility.

I'm not really up to speed on all of the arguments about the treaties and existing land claims, and I don't know how all of these problems with reserves are going to be solved, but I do know that once a system is established where people are treated as inferior and marginalized, their second class status can continue on for generations.

Many of the comments about natives or blacks imply that they are inferior stock since they haven't achieved equality yet. If it's all a matter of personal responsibility to improve, then your logic indicates you believe that their lack of progress is because they are inferior, even if you haven't thought it through yet. There are no other options.

Those who are able to take personal responsibility, will rise above their surroundings. But how many will grow up with a fatalistic attitude, unable to see a way out of the misery that surrounds them in their communities? I hope someone's got the answers!

[Borg]

I'm not really up to speed on all of the arguments about the treaties and existing land claims, and I don't know how all of these problems with reserves are going to be solved, but I do know that once a system is established where people are treated as inferior and marginalized, their second class status can continue on for generations.

Many of the comments about natives or blacks imply that they are inferior stock since they haven't achieved equality yet. If it's all a matter of personal responsibility to improve, then your logic indicates you believe that their lack of progress is because they are inferior, even if you haven't thought it through yet. There are no other options.

Those who are able to take personal responsibility, will rise above their surroundings. But how many will grow up with a fatalistic attitude, unable to see a way out of the misery that surrounds them in their communities? I hope someone's got the answers!

Actually the reason they are in such trouble is not because of the whitemen - it is because they allow their leadership to run rampant and they actually believe their elders that the old ways are better.

Sorry, the old ways are old and gone and cannot be brought back - time to move on.

Your response - almost an attack - just show you are so full of schite your eyes are brown. I suppose that IS an attack - but then again if no one demands they join society whose fauilt is it if they kill each other off? Crime, drugs, alcohol - I am not involved by personal choice - they are no different and I am tired of others making excuses for them.

Remember - it is usually indian on indian violence.

So - I am prepped to welcome them on board - but if they want to be idiots and kill themselves off - then be my guest.

Time for them to straighten up and jump om board - or be left in a mud bowl of their own creation.

They have all the advantages just waiting for them - they just need to exercise some "personal responsibility".

Where is their leadership?

Living in luxury while the rank and file live in squallor? They vote those so called elders into power - therefore they reap what they sow.

Borg

[charter.rights]

I'm not really up to speed on all of the arguments about the treaties and existing land claims, and I don't know how all of these problems with reserves are going to be solved, but I do know that once a system is established where people are treated as inferior and marginalized, their second class status can continue on for generations.

Many of the comments about natives or blacks imply that they are inferior stock since they haven't achieved equality yet. If it's all a matter of personal responsibility to improve, then your logic indicates you believe that their lack of progress is because they are inferior, even if you haven't thought it through yet. There are no other options.

Those who are able to take personal responsibility, will rise above their surroundings. But how many will grow up with a fatalistic attitude, unable to see a way out of the misery that surrounds them in their communities? I hope someone's got the answers!

The first step it seems is for them to decolonize their thinking- to get rid of the idea that competition and destruction represent progress. Once this happens then their victimization stops and they are able to recover some sense of who they are. Education and employment, while essential in today's society, isn't the end-all to being a good human being. Building character is much more important, and finding personal fortitude to shield them from accepting the status quo is necessary.

First Nation people each have unique ways of dealing with things and even though we may think that hereditary government structures are non-democratic, we must first let them decide how to govern themselves, without interference. All the corruption that we read about (which is embellished for media sparkle) is based on our system of government imposed on reserve and if we think about they are just a microcosm of our own corrupt system. Only, since our government organization is much larger, corruption is more easily hidden from the public. The reality is that hereditary systems do work and can operate free of corruption, so long as our government stays out of the way. How? Just look at our own family structure - the grandparent to great grandchild is a hereditary system, often loosely governed by a older matriarch or patriarch. It works because it is based on a system of family love and respect. If natives choose a democratic system, then again it doesn't mean that because they choose something other than our corrupt oligarchy that it is wrong.

Children are best cared for in their own communities. We used to once have a system like that where churches held a community together looked after each other. But today we have incorporated communities and instead of having concern for our neighbours, we let the state do it for us and then complain about the loss of power over what we have to decide ourselves. First Nations communities are so rife with social illnesses that it is difficult to find a community capable of looking after their own children. However, we must trust that they can, and provide the support (and money) needed to help each other. One thing we do know is that often when you are caring for someone else, our own problems don't seem to be so bad. And by allowing them the support and space to solve problems, it will build up self-esteem and self-worth - very necessary components of good character.

So the short uncomplicated answer is to leave them alone, instead of constantly fueling the problem with our best solutions that are really based on benefiting our own special interests . There are details in which we can get lost, but until we understand the very basic problem - loss of community - we'll never be in a position to criticize.

[charter.rights]

Actually the reason they are in such trouble is not because of the whitemen - it is because they allow their leadership to run rampant and they actually believe their elders that the old ways are better.

Sorry, the old ways are old and gone and cannot be brought back - time to move on.

Your response - almost an attack - just show you are so full of schite your eyes are brown. I suppose that IS an attack - but then again if no one demands they join society whose fauilt is it if they kill each other off? Crime, drugs, alcohol - I am not involved by personal choice - they are no different and I am tired of others making excuses for them.

Remember - it is usually indian on indian violence.

So - I am prepped to welcome them on board - but if they want to be idiots and kill themselves off - then be my guest.

Time for them to straighten up and jump om board - or be left in a mud bowl of their own creation.

They have all the advantages just waiting for them - they just need to exercise some "personal responsibility".

Where is their leadership?

Living in luxury while the rank and file live in squallor? They vote those so called elders into power - therefore they reap what they sow.

Borg

Thanks Borg. You just provided a perfect example of the wrong thinking that is causing the problem, identified in my post.

Edited April 20, 2008 by charter.rights

[myata]

OK, one more time: do status aboriginals pay income tax, like the rest of us??

Yes. 80% of status natives live off reserve and pay income tax, sales taxes and property taxes just like the rest of us.

OK. And they enjoy all the same services as the rest of us; thats how things should be.

The 20% who live on reserve work income is not considered "income" and therefore not taxable. However, the unemployment rate on reserve can be as high as 60% and those that do work earn so little the even if they were required to pay tax, they would still be in the poverty bracket of the tax scale.

OK, so the answer here is, No. Reserves do not contribute to the revenues of the country; which too would be OK with me, if they mostly relied on thier own means, as independent societies; of course with access to all services off reserve as required by treaties; not paying a cent for them, as compensation for the past land deals; as my understanding of the general principle of the deal was.

But I'm not overly excited about that idea of one community obligated to continuously sponsor, or "fund", another. Where did this come from?? It looks like, again, you want it both ways: i.e independence in the matters of arranging the internal affairs; while relying on the outside community to pay for it; not realizing perhaps that the two are closely tied; society operating by the laws of middle ages (hereditory transition of power; limited individual rights, political and property; etc, etc) cannot prosper on par with the modern democratic societies; that's the core of your misunderstanding; you can have a 1700 hunter-gatherer community; or you can have a modern metropolis; but you can't have the first living on the same level of living standard, as the second.

The taxes we pay do not directly fund our services. They are "transferred" in the system, some to bolster have-not provinces and others to fund services that should otherwise be user-pay. The government has income sources that don't involve a tax base, including royalties paid on natural resources, investment of things like CPP and even EI, which is drawn from our paychecks as an insurance and not a tax. It also receives billions in excise taxes etc.

..

Funding First Nations at the same rate as other communities is an imperative step in their recovery.

I never said "directly"; but yes, all revenues government receives are coming from its citizens, individual and corporate (which are owned by individuals). That's another confusion that would be good for you to clarify: there isn't a free lunch; there isn't a government with black hole deep pockets full of cash which magically refill overnight; it's all, 100% of it paid by people around you;

..

no, nobody should be made to pay, unconditionally and no questions asked, expenses of others; this would be like slavery; the only thing you can count on (apart from example and advice) is voluntary assistance, aka donation. There's no obligation on the rest of the country to pump the cash into a few backward communities to make the appearance of things looking like everywhere else (except they won't, really, even then - because everywhere else those things, they are made by the people themselves, right?).

How can you heal a cut when you can't supply a band aid? That would be the first step in healing.

I suggest, separate the notions in you mind; for healing a cut, there's process of redemption; apologies; books; museums; exhibitions; films; reconciliation commissions; and so on.

For the prosperity, there's a will and hard work; with help of others around you;

They are two different things; one will never replace another; and nobody can give it to you.

Once all of the poverty driven problems - those that the government is directly responsible for -

Wrong btw - government isn't "responsible" for poverty problems. Government provides some tools to assist people in overcoming their poverty; it's impossible to make somebody who wants to be poor, or doesn't care to be anything else, rich against their will.

then they can at least start working on solutions like economic development, sustainable resource management etc.

...

However, while they are focused on poor wealth, undrinkable water, poor education and poor social services many First Nations become distracted with the dispair of poverty, and most give up. If we really want them to succeed then we have to offer sincere and honest driven hope.

I'm sure such programs exist; and probably can be improved, in many ways; the important thing to understand is that in the end, they'll only be as efficient as the community's will to help itself; not a prerequisite; not a condition; only assistence that can only go so far, and won't solve anything unless people themselves start seriously working on the solution.

As e.g. many of those water, education, social problems; they are all community issues; and unlimately, it's up to the community, not somebody from outside, to fix them.

Lastly I don't give in to threats or conditions,

Threats? What's that all about? If you don't answer clear and direct question asked several times, indeed there's little point for your being in this discussion.

[Borg]

Thanks Borg. You just provided a perfect example of the wrong thinking that is causing the problem, identified in my post.

No one in canada is responsible for the maintenance of a life style - be it good or bad - for others. It is up to the individual to make their way in the world.

Seems to me you are on a tall horse. Time to come down to reality. Nothing will change until you and others like you step down to reality.

Let me see - another big criminal bust in Cornwall again - hmmm ...... indian cigarette smugglers. Drugs violence and more - all brought to you on the nearest reserve. While many live in squallor the leaders do very well.

Perception is reality and the common perception is the indian is creating his own problems.

I am happy to oblige - be aware of this - if you believe me to be so wrong - then a large number of canadians are also wrong - what makes you so right?

Have a great day. I know I will.

Borg

[charter.rights]

No one in canada is responsible for the maintenance of a life style - be it good or bad - for others. It is up to the individual to make their way in the world.

Seems to me you are on a tall horse. Time to come down to reality. Nothing will change until you and others like you step down to reality.

Let me see - another big criminal bust in Cornwall again - hmmm ...... indian cigarette smugglers. Drugs violence and more - all brought to you on the nearest reserve. While many live in squallor the leaders do very well.

Perception is reality and the common perception is the indian is creating his own problems.

I am happy to oblige - be aware of this - if you believe me to be so wrong - then a large number of canadians are also wrong - what makes you so right?

Have a great day. I know I will.

Borg

You are wrong, and most Canadians don't care. Your perceptions hold no reality.

[Melanie_]

The first step it seems is for them to decolonize their thinking- to get rid of the idea that competition and destruction represent progress. Once this happens then their victimization stops and they are able to recover some sense of who they are. Education and employment, while essential in today's society, isn't the end-all to being a good human being. Building character is much more important, and finding personal fortitude to shield them from accepting the status quo is necessary.

First Nation people each have unique ways of dealing with things and even though we may think that hereditary government structures are non-democratic, we must first let them decide how to govern themselves, without interference. All the corruption that we read about (which is embellished for media sparkle) is based on our system of government imposed on reserve and if we think about they are just a microcosm of our own corrupt system. Only, since our government organization is much larger, corruption is more easily hidden from the public. The reality is that hereditary systems do work and can operate free of corruption, so long as our government stays out of the way. How? Just look at our own family structure - the grandparent to great grandchild is a hereditary system, often loosely governed by a older matriarch or patriarch. It works because it is based on a system of family love and respect. If natives choose a democratic system, then again it doesn't mean that because they choose something other than our corrupt oligarchy that it is wrong.

Children are best cared for in their own communities. We used to once have a system like that where churches held a community together looked after each other. But today we have incorporated communities and instead of having concern for our neighbours, we let the state do it for us and then complain about the loss of power over what we have to decide ourselves. First Nations communities are so rife with social illnesses that it is difficult to find a community capable of looking after their own children. However, we must trust that they can, and provide the support (and money) needed to help each other. One thing we do know is that often when you are caring for someone else, our own problems don't seem to be so bad. And by allowing them the support and space to solve problems, it will build up self-esteem and self-worth - very necessary components of good character.

So the short uncomplicated answer is to leave them alone, instead of constantly fueling the problem with our best solutions that are really based on benefiting our own special interests . There are details in which we can get lost, but until we understand the very basic problem - loss of community - we'll never be in a position to criticize.

How many children are you willing to sit back and watch die while they are sorting all of this out? These kids can't be sacrificed as collateral damage to building up their parents' self esteem and self worth. If the parents need help, by all means give it to them, but not at the expense of their kids. Children are not best cared for in their communities, they are best cared for by people who aren't abusive. If that can be found in the communites, wonderful. If it can be supported and fostered in the communities, great. But if it can't (and you have pointed out that these communities are difficult to find), the children can't be abandoned to lives of abuse, simply because of their race. The larger community can't turn their back on these kids, anymore than we can turn our back on white kids, black kids, asian kids, or any other demographic you can come up with. Abuse isn't an aboriginal issue, and we can't just overlook it or excuse it because of race.

There are plenty of aboriginal parents who are raising their children free of abuse, which is important to recognize. They may be able to take in foster kids in their communities, or they may not be able to. Sometimes the problem with keeping kids in their communities is that the communities are small and everyone's related to each other. This can make it hard to maintain the neccessary distance between an abusive parent and their child. My preference would be to remove the parent from the community rather than the child, but that doesn't seem to be a very popular position.

[WIP]

The first step it seems is for them to decolonize their thinking- to get rid of the idea that competition and destruction represent progress. Once this happens then their victimization stops and they are able to recover some sense of who they are. Education and employment, while essential in today's society, isn't the end-all to being a good human being. Building character is much more important, and finding personal fortitude to shield them from accepting the status quo is necessary.

No doubt some cultural changes are going to be needed if we're going to survive past the 21st Century. We're finding out now how overcrowded our world is since India and China have started moving from subsistence agriculture into a full scale industrial evolution. The rapid increase in air pollution and environmental degradation seems to indicate that the world won't survive the growing pains that allowed a trial and error system of fixing environmental damage in the West. Consumer-driven free enterprize has been the most effective model for increasing wealth, but if it means the survival of the human race, some adjustments are going to be needed.

In China, the Communist rulers have pushed for rapid growth because there is still a large segment of the population living in rural poverty, and dissuade them from leaving rural villages on mass and flooding the cities to look for work. But some party officials, especially in the big cities, are also concerned about growing shortage of clean water and the growing numbers of people that are suffering from environmental-related illnesses. So, there is a conflict between the officials who want to slow the growth until they can find ways to do it cleaner, and the ones who want to build a whole bunch of coal-fired generating stations to meet the growing demand for electricity. I hope the ones who are thinking about the environment win out, for all of our sa

First Nation people each have unique ways of dealing with things and even though we may think that hereditary government structures are non-democratic, we must first let them decide how to govern themselves, without interference. All the corruption that we read about (which is embellished for media sparkle) is based on our system of government imposed on reserve and if we think about they are just a microcosm of our own corrupt system. Only, since our government organization is much larger, corruption is more easily hidden from the public. The reality is that hereditary systems do work and can operate free of corruption, so long as our government stays out of the way. How? Just look at our own family structure - the grandparent to great grandchild is a hereditary system, often loosely governed by a older matriarch or patriarch. It works because it is based on a system of family love and respect. If natives choose a democratic system, then again it doesn't mean that because they choose something other than our corrupt oligarchy that it is wrong.

I haven't been following the land dispute in Caledonia that closely although I probably should since it's within a 20 minute drive from home; but one of the problems that keeps popping up is that the government doesn't have a clear negotiating partner. Who's in charge, the hereditary chiefs and clan mothers, or the elected band council in Oshwegan? I'm all for keeping cultural heritage, but I can't buy the notion that in this day and age, a closed system of hereditary leadership is better than a democratic system. There are problems with elected councils, especially on isolated reserves. They have dictatorial powers over the people living there. You might consider it outside interference, but the only solution is for the people to have access to higher levels of government, and that can't happen if First Nations are totally independent of the Federal and/or Provincial governments.

Children are best cared for in their own communities. We used to once have a system like that where churches held a community together looked after each other. But today we have incorporated communities and instead of having concern for our neighbours, we let the state do it for us and then complain about the loss of power over what we have to decide ourselves. First Nations communities are so rife with social illnesses that it is difficult to find a community capable of looking after their own children. However, we must trust that they can, and provide the support (and money) needed to help each other. One thing we do know is that often when you are caring for someone else, our own problems don't seem to be so bad. And by allowing them the support and space to solve problems, it will build up self-esteem and self-worth - very necessary components of good character.

So the short uncomplicated answer is to leave them alone, instead of constantly fueling the problem with our best solutions that are really based on benefiting our own special interests . There are details in which we can get lost, but until we understand the very basic problem - loss of community - we'll never be in a position to criticize.

I almost forgot about the native schooling systems that took children away and forced them to abandon their languages and culture back home - not to mention all of the ones who were physically and/or sexually assaulted during the process. Who knows how much damage this little interlude to Christianize the heathens did to these societies! If they had stayed in their communities, we wouldn't have so many aboriginals who are rootless and nihilistic running around today!

[charter.rights]

I haven't been following the land dispute in Caledonia that closely although I probably should since it's within a 20 minute drive from home; but one of the problems that keeps popping up is that the government doesn't have a clear negotiating partner. Who's in charge, the hereditary chiefs and clan mothers, or the elected band council in Oshwegan? I'm all for keeping cultural heritage, but I can't buy the notion that in this day and age, a closed system of hereditary leadership is better than a democratic system. There are problems with elected councils, especially on isolated reserves. They have dictatorial powers over the people living there. You might consider it outside interference, but the only solution is for the people to have access to higher levels of government, and that can't happen if First Nations are totally independent of the Federal and/or Provincial governments.

The government DOES have a clear negotiating partner. The people authorized the Confederacy Chiefs to sit at the table on their behalf. They just don't get to make the decisions for the people, that is all. They are there as part of a representative democratic system, representing the people of Six Nations. On the other hand our side who are not clear. Our negotiators have said repeatedly that they do not have a mandate to offer or accept and proposals and must take all things back to Ottawa (and Harper) for vetting. And it would seem that the people in Caledonia aren't even being considered in the decision making progress. Instead the government is attempting to dictate the solutions.

Six Nations is not a closed hereditary system. It is much too large a nation for that You should do a bit of research. The Six Nations' Confederacy is the oldest surviving democracy in the world.

Having access to higher levels of government is the root of the problem, not the solution. And corruption is based on the paternalistic approach we have towards First Nations. Their independence isn't a question of whether we allow it. It is their right under the Charter.

[Borg]

Their independence isn't a question of whether we allow it. It is their right under the Charter.

Independence?

They have it - freedom of movement, freedom to live as they want - they also have the right to work and to live - or the right to do nothing.

No one stops them from being and doing as they want - except themselves and their corrupt leadership.

Where is the argument?

I think it is time to change your name to "Tall Horse". You sit upon it and pontificate - yet do not ask the indian to exercise personal responsibility.

Just another reason why you are so easily discounted.

Borg

[charter.rights]

Independence?

They have it - freedom of movement, freedom to live as they want - they also have the right to work and to live - or the right to do nothing.

No one stops them from being and doing as they want - except themselves and their corrupt leadership.

Where is the argument?

I think it is time to change your name to "Tall Horse". You sit upon it and pontificate - yet do not ask the indian to exercise personal responsibility.

Just another reason why you are so easily discounted.

Borg

[AngusThermopyle]

Do you mind if I ask what the point was in quoting an entire post but adding no comment of your own? Does that mean you agree 100% with what was posted?

[DangerMouse]

Do you mind if I ask what the point was in quoting an entire post but adding no comment of your own? Does that mean you agree 100% with what was posted?

Whats that Angusthrowupandmakeapile?

[AngusThermopyle]

Whats that Angusthrowupandmakeapile?

Predictability can be so gratifying.

[Melanie_]

To go back to the original question, regarding deaths of aboriginal children, here’s an update on Christopher Pauchay…..

Christopher Pauchay's family believes he is "suffering enough" and does not need to face a criminal trial for the freezing deaths of his two young daughters on the Yellow Quill reserve three months ago.

Tracey Jimmy, Pauchay's common-law wife and the mother of the girls, said on the phone Thursday her husband plans to plead not guilty to the charge of criminal negligence causing death.

~snip~

Jimmy's aunt, Sarah Peequaquat, also described the deaths as an accident.

"I don't think he should have even got charged, because usually he was the one who took care of his kids, drunk or sober. That's all he was trying to do."

Winnipeg Free Press

I do feel sorry for this man, who will have to live his life bearing the burden of guilt for his children’s deaths. His wife says they were alcoholics before this tragedy, and now are clean and sober; however, she was drinking throughout her recent pregnancy, and gave birth two weeks ago to another daughter.

He has been charged with criminal negligence causing death, but his family and the people on the reserve seem to feel he has suffered enough and shouldn’t have any charges against him. As I said, I feel sorry for him, but I can’t support sending the message that being drunk is an excuse for negligent parenting. Kids are vulnerable, and they need their parents to be responsible and protective of them. This wasn’t an accident, it was totally preventable, and the choices he made led to the death of his children – he needs to be held accountable.

[charter.rights]

To go back to the original question, regarding deaths of aboriginal children, here’s an update on Christopher Pauchay…..

Winnipeg Free Press

I do feel sorry for this man, who will have to live his life bearing the burden of guilt for his children’s deaths. His wife says they were alcoholics before this tragedy, and now are clean and sober; however, she was drinking throughout her recent pregnancy, and gave birth two weeks ago to another daughter.

He has been charged with criminal negligence causing death, but his family and the people on the reserve seem to feel he has suffered enough and shouldn’t have any charges against him. As I said, I feel sorry for him, but I can’t support sending the message that being drunk is an excuse for negligent parenting. Kids are vulnerable, and they need their parents to be responsible and protective of them. This wasn’t an accident, it was totally preventable, and the choices he made led to the death of his children – he needs to be held accountable.

Non-stigmatizing shame has a greater effect in changing behavior than any court imposed penalty can. And since that is apparent the call for justice is really a call for revenge, based on false empathy and dissonance. Alcohol was a factor, yes but that does not mean that we should kill the sick spirit and grind it further into the ground. Something of this nature comes from a state of insanity. The cure for insanity isn't to treat them with another insane act, but through the sane mind present true compassion and concern for the victims - both living and dead - of this horrific event.

True justice is when a sane man willingly takes the punishment he has imposed on himself and grows from it.

[August1991]

Non-stigmatizing shame has a greater effect in changing behavior than any court imposed penalty can. And since that is apparent the call for justice is really a call for revenge, based on false empathy and dissonance. Alcohol was a factor, yes but that does not mean that we should kill the sick spirit and grind it further into the ground. Something of this nature comes from a state of insanity. The cure for insanity isn't to treat them with another insane act, but through the sane mind present true compassion and concern for the victims - both living and dead - of this horrific event.

True justice is when a sane man willingly takes the punishment he has imposed on himself and grows from it.

It seems to me that true justice is preventing other children from suffering a similar fate.

How would North Americans, several thousand years ago, have dealt with such a crime? Would any be alive today if parents could abandon, without penalty, their children to die in the snow?

Ten weeks after the band council of Natuashish, an Innu reserve in northern Labrador, banned alcohol, police in the community say crime has dramatically decreased. Proof, the band chief said, that the ban is working.

Before the controversial ban, Natuashish was a community plagued by sexual assaults and domestic violence, but police have said crime is down to one-third of what it was before the ban.

CBC

----

I have no simple answer to all these questions. But I have some half-baked ideas. First, I think that we should stop giving money to Indians - welfare sometimes solves a problem but not always and never in the long term. The Indian Act is bad for Indians and bad for Canada. Second, I think Indians should stop whining (it's not respectful). Third, I think Indians should be free to be what they are.

[DangerMouse]

It seems to me that true justice is preventing other children from suffering a similar fate.

How would North Americans, several thousand years ago, have dealt with such a crime? Would any be alive today if parents could abandon, without penalty, their children to die in the snow?

CBC

----

I have no simple answer to all these questions. But I have some half-baked ideas. First, I think that we should stop giving money to Indians - welfare sometimes solves a problem but not always and never in the long term. The Indian Act is bad for Indians and bad for Canada. Second, I think Indians should stop whining (it's not respectful). Third, I think Indians should be free to be what they are.

Hey August, do you get some sort of cheap thrill from the term Indian? Grow up? Your worse than the "little boy right wingers." When you say half baked, do you mean half ripped? The way you post, you're the whining one....

[charter.rights]

It seems to me that true justice is preventing other children from suffering a similar fate.

How would North Americans, several thousand years ago, have dealt with such a crime? Would any be alive today if parents could abandon, without penalty, their children to die in the snow?

CBC

----

I have no simple answer to all these questions. But I have some half-baked ideas. First, I think that we should stop giving money to Indians - welfare sometimes solves a problem but not always and never in the long term. The Indian Act is bad for Indians and bad for Canada. Second, I think Indians should stop whining (it's not respectful). Third, I think Indians should be free to be what they are.

I agree that giving support to children in crisis is the first step to justice. However, that can;t be achieved by also in the same breath as you suggest, denying their parents welfare or other financial supplements. Proper funding of child and family services on reserve and not underfunding as is the case today would be a good start in protecting children and counseling their parents. You did know that these kids of serves are under funded by more than 50% than mainstream? That is why your ideas are truly half baked.

In the past justice would have been achieved through healing. This wasn't a murder for which some retribution would have been sought. It was an act of ill thinking on behalf of the father. The fact that his family should have known about his sickness and the community means that they would also participate in their healing. In a community based society the kind of ill thinking that would see children die of negligence would have an impact on the entire community and the push for community wide healing would help prevent such a tragedy from happening ever again.

Yet most people's reaction to this is one of revenge and punishment. That in itself is an insane reaction that badly reflects our societal thinking today.......

Correctional Services Canada

Living Justice Press

http://eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2...80/16/b3/dd.pdf

Edited May 3, 2008 by charter.rights

[DangerMouse]

Predictability can be so gratifying.

OPPS I meant Angus "THROWUPANDMAKEAPILE-WITH-YOUR-BS!" You right-wingers are indeed, worse than kids....

[Borg]

This guy and his wife - in my opinion are both guilty.

I often wonder why personal responsibility is not demanded.

A drunk is a drunk is a drunk - white, black or indian.

In the end - why it is he was even allowed to have kids in the house?

Where were the "elders" - those who have the wisdom to guide poor troubled souls? Drinking with him?

Too bad he did not lay down and go to sleep out there himself.

One less problem for the government to support.

Proper funding of child support?

How easy to deflect the truth of the problem - a drunk killed some kids - and turn it into a government problem.

The feds give the money to the indians and they distribute it on the reserve.

Oh, wait a minute - perhaps there was some money NOT making it to the right places?

Gimme a break.

This was not a murder? It was a drunk - doing what drunks do.

If he had been behind the wheel of a vehicle would he be getting this sympathy?

Sorry - he exercised his choices - both life choices and immediate vicinity choices. He does not deserve any sympathy. Although there will be those who believe he is a victim of society.

He is a victim all right. A victim of his own people and their crooked rulers who tolerate this type of action.

So much for the wisdom of the supposed "elder".

Dispicable all round - and now "inadequate funding" comes into the story as part of the problem? Gotta' be kidding me.

He did nothing more than kill some kids and now is receiving this sympathy.

Nice. Real nice.

Borg

Edited May 3, 2008 by Borg