PUBLIC AND PRIVATE RESPONSIBILITIES IN CHILD WELFARE: A Review of the Distribution of Functions in Child Welfare Between Public and Private Agencies in Four Canadian Provinces. Prepared by Barbara Gene Errington, Ruth Freeman, and Gail Greenwell under the direction of Mr. J. V. Fornataro. April, 1964. This study is concerned with the development of protective and adoptive services for children under public and voluntary auspices in four provinces; namely, Nova Scotia, Ontario, British Columbia, and Saskatchewan. An attempt is made to delineate areas of responsibility in the administration of the relevant child welfare statutes. This study is part of a larger project which is concerned with an examination of the changing relationships between public and voluntary social welfare and of issues raised by these relationships. The major public and private child welfare agencies in the four provinces were canvassed for information. An examination was made of pertinent statistical reports and of relevant statutes. The writers reviewed the literature which articulated the position and the rationale of both voluntary and public intervention, particularly as this applies to child welfare. The study revealed that the legal principle and statutory provisions in all four provinces were fundamentally similar, although differences were observed. The pattern of allocating responsibility for services was found to be different in each province. In Nova Scotia, both private and government agencies administer the Child Welfare Act, with no discernible criterion for the establishment of one or the other, in any particular geographic area. The private agencies receive from 50 to 75 per cent of their revenue from the governments. In Ontario, all direct service under the Act is provided by private agencies, which, on the average, receive 90 per cent of their funds from the governments. In Saskatchewan, all services under the Child Welfare Act are provided by the governmental department. In British Columbia, the provisions of Child Welfare Statutes are administered by the government except in the urban areas of Vancouver and Victoria where Children's Aid Societies implement the statutes. In all provinces, the broad outline of services appears to be similar. Finally, issues arising out of this study are identified for possible subsequent examination. / Arts, Faculty of / Social Work, School of / Graduate

This project outlines the existence of neoliberal multiculturalism and identifies the implications and limitations of its practice. Neoliberal multiculturalism involves the institutionalization of group autonomy by the state to download responsibility to jurisdictions that have historically lacked sufficient fiscal capacity and have been hampered by colonialism in the development of the political capacity necessary to fully meet the requirements entailed by the devolution. At the same time, this practice releases the formerly responsible jurisdiction from the political burden of the policy area(s) despite its continued influence and effect. As demonstrated by my analysis of the Indigenous child welfare devolution that has occurred recently in Manitoba, neoliberal multiculturalism therefore involves a certain kind of “privatization”—that is, it involves the appearance of state distance from said policy area. This practice problematizes the traceability of power and decision making while at the same time it co-opts and in many ways neutralizes demands from critics of the state by giving the appearance of state concession to these demands. In response to the dangers of neoliberal multiculturalism, I situate multiculturalism in a robustly political model of democratic multi-nationalism (characterized by both agonism and deliberation) in order to combat multiculturalism’s tendency simply to rationalize “privatization” and to enhance democratic accountability. My approach goes beyond dominant constructions of group autonomy through group rights by emphasizing that autonomy is a relational political practice rather than a resource distributed by a benevolent state. Building on my analysis of Indigenous autonomy and the unique challenges that it presents for traditional democratic practices, I outline a contextually sensitive, case-specific employment of what I term “democratic multi-nationalism”. This approach conceives of Indigenous issues as inherently political in nature, as opposed to culturally defined and constituted, and therefore better meets the challenges of the colonial legacy and context of deep difference in which Indigenous-state relations take place today.

Stress and burnout have received a great deal of attention in the child welfare field. This has been due to such issues as the high workload, the complexity of the cases, working with resistant and at times violent clients and the negative work environment of the youth protection agency. These factors have a detrimental effect on the worker's personal and professional resources and undermine the healthy functioning of the agency, all of which ultimately affects best practice with clients. One way in which child welfare organizations could make an effort towards reclaiming clinical practice is to engage in training for its workforce. Training can benefit practitioners by improving their skills and knowledge and this can lead to greater job satisfaction. Agency functioning is improved by having a trained workforce as well as social workers who are knowledgeable regarding agency policies, values and models of intervention. Children and families ultimately benefit by working with practitioners who are equipped with the appropriate skills. These benefits for workers, clients and the agency cannot materialize unless barriers are removed and changes within the agency take place in order to support the effective transfer of knowledge and training.

This project outlines the existence of neoliberal multiculturalism and identifies the implications and limitations of its practice. Neoliberal multiculturalism involves the institutionalization of group autonomy by the state to download responsibility to jurisdictions that have historically lacked sufficient fiscal capacity and have been hampered by colonialism in the development of the political capacity necessary to fully meet the requirements entailed by the devolution. At the same time, this practice releases the formerly responsible jurisdiction from the political burden of the policy area(s) despite its continued influence and effect. As demonstrated by my analysis of the Indigenous child welfare devolution that has occurred recently in Manitoba, neoliberal multiculturalism therefore involves a certain kind of “privatization”—that is, it involves the appearance of state distance from said policy area. This practice problematizes the traceability of power and decision making while at the same time it co-opts and in many ways neutralizes demands from critics of the state by giving the appearance of state concession to these demands. In response to the dangers of neoliberal multiculturalism, I situate multiculturalism in a robustly political model of democratic multi-nationalism (characterized by both agonism and deliberation) in order to combat multiculturalism’s tendency simply to rationalize “privatization” and to enhance democratic accountability. My approach goes beyond dominant constructions of group autonomy through group rights by emphasizing that autonomy is a relational political practice rather than a resource distributed by a benevolent state. Building on my analysis of Indigenous autonomy and the unique challenges that it presents for traditional democratic practices, I outline a contextually sensitive, case-specific employment of what I term “democratic multi-nationalism”. This approach conceives of Indigenous issues as inherently political in nature, as opposed to culturally defined and constituted, and therefore better meets the challenges of the colonial legacy and context of deep difference in which Indigenous-state relations take place today.

This project outlines the existence of neoliberal multiculturalism and identifies the implications and limitations of its practice. Neoliberal multiculturalism involves the institutionalization of group autonomy by the state to download responsibility to jurisdictions that have historically lacked sufficient fiscal capacity and have been hampered by colonialism in the development of the political capacity necessary to fully meet the requirements entailed by the devolution. At the same time, this practice releases the formerly responsible jurisdiction from the political burden of the policy area(s) despite its continued influence and effect. As demonstrated by my analysis of the Indigenous child welfare devolution that has occurred recently in Manitoba, neoliberal multiculturalism therefore involves a certain kind of “privatization”—that is, it involves the appearance of state distance from said policy area. This practice problematizes the traceability of power and decision making while at the same time it co-opts and in many ways neutralizes demands from critics of the state by giving the appearance of state concession to these demands. In response to the dangers of neoliberal multiculturalism, I situate multiculturalism in a robustly political model of democratic multi-nationalism (characterized by both agonism and deliberation) in order to combat multiculturalism’s tendency simply to rationalize “privatization” and to enhance democratic accountability. My approach goes beyond dominant constructions of group autonomy through group rights by emphasizing that autonomy is a relational political practice rather than a resource distributed by a benevolent state. Building on my analysis of Indigenous autonomy and the unique challenges that it presents for traditional democratic practices, I outline a contextually sensitive, case-specific employment of what I term “democratic multi-nationalism”. This approach conceives of Indigenous issues as inherently political in nature, as opposed to culturally defined and constituted, and therefore better meets the challenges of the colonial legacy and context of deep difference in which Indigenous-state relations take place today. / Arts, Faculty of / Political Science, Department of / Graduate

No description available.

The Canadian child welfare system has increasingly found itself under attack for its treatment of First Nations children. The charge is made that it imposes a colonial regime on First Nations families which negates the importance of their cultural identity, and devalues their cultural practices and traditions. Self-government is consistently advanced as the only appropriate response. The question this thesis addresses is whether too much faith is placed in self-government, without sufficient protections for children in the communities. The issue of First Nations child welfare is placed within the wider debates over the need for decolonisation in Canada. It is a premise of this thesis that First Nations hold an inherent right to self-government which demands respect for their sovereign authority in core areas such as child welfare. However, self-government is not a panacea for First Nations communities. The legacy of colonialism continues to manifest itself in the socioeconomic problems prevalent on many reserves/These problems pose a direct challenge to self-governing child welfare agencies and to the safety of the children in their care. This raises the dilemma of how to ensure the fundamental rights of First Nations children are effectively protected, whilst also respecting the 'sovereign' jurisdiction of First Nations communities. The attempts of non-native society to impose controls on First Nations governments, principally through the imposition of the Canadian Charter, are rejected on the basis they continue to perpetuate a colonial philosophy. However, adopting a theory of 'rejuvenated universalism,' and on the basis of a dialogue with three native controlled child welfare agencies in British Columbia, it is argued that agreement on fundamental standards of child welfare could be forged across native and non-native cultures. It is suggested these standards should be guaranteed in a Children's Charter binding all governments in Canada. A Children's Charter which has been developed through fully inclusive cross-cultural dialogue, and which consequently reflects the values of all the various cultures, would provide an essential mechanism for the external evaluation and review of child welfare agencies in Canada, whether native or non-native, according to their own freely accepted values and principles.

Few efforts have been made to understand the subjective experiences of birthparents involved in the child welfare system, especially of those who have had their parental rights permanently removed. The research undertaken seeks an initial investigation of this neglected issue, providing accounts of four birthmothers' experiences of having one or more of their children involuntarily and permanently removed from their care as a result of child neglect. Implicit in this research is the assumption that these mothers do indeed suffer tremendous grief over the loss of their children, regardless of child welfare agencies' assessments of their parenting capacities. Furthermore, the research critically evaluates how child welfare practice and policy might serve to exacerbate incumbent issues of loss, ultimately disenfranchising this already isolated and stigmatized population. Therefore, this qualitative study endeavours to assist not only child protection workers, but also the greater community in better understanding what it is like to be a "child welfare parent" who has had her parental rights terminated, and to be aware of the existing imbalance of power between child welfare agencies and the clientele they serve. The study ultimately aims to help ensure that human dignity and genuine respect are not lost in the work of child protection.

This study is concerned with the evaluation and comparison of a portion of the laws and practices relating to the care and protection of children in five nations: Canada, the United States, Denmark, Italy, and Greece. The subjects discussed include administrative differences, compulsory education, child labour regulations, adoption, the welfare of handicapped and crippled children and grants to needy dependent children. To some extent in the evaluating and in the comparing processes, the factors causing differences in standards of care and protection of children are brought to light. Comparisons have been made in two ways, e.g., by measuring one nation's laws -and practices against another, and by measuring the standards of each nation against international standards and principles. Although it has been found that all five nations have weaknesses in these provisions for the protection of children, a vast difference of strength is shown between Canada, Denmark, and the United States on the one hand -and Greece and Italy on the other. It is the conclusion of the author that these differences show the necessity for international action and help for nations unable to provide adequately for their children without outside help. Considerable difficulty was experienced in finding material for research. Generally, four sources were used for the compilation of relevant information. These were: The University Library, national and international agencies and offices, friends working in the field of social work in the countries studied, -and an amount of material and information gathered by the writer while working in three of the countries involved. / Arts, Faculty of / Social Work, School of / Graduate

The Canadian child welfare system has increasingly found itself under attack for its treatment of First Nations children. The charge is made that it imposes a colonial regime on First Nations families which negates the importance of their cultural identity, and devalues their cultural practices and traditions. Self-government is consistently advanced as the only appropriate response. The question this thesis addresses is whether too much faith is placed in self-government, without sufficient protections for children in the communities. The issue of First Nations child welfare is placed within the wider debates over the need for decolonisation in Canada. It is a premise of this thesis that First Nations hold an inherent right to self-government which demands respect for their sovereign authority in core areas such as child welfare. However, self-government is not a panacea for First Nations communities. The legacy of colonialism continues to manifest itself in the socioeconomic problems prevalent on many reserves/These problems pose a direct challenge to self-governing child welfare agencies and to the safety of the children in their care. This raises the dilemma of how to ensure the fundamental rights of First Nations children are effectively protected, whilst also respecting the 'sovereign' jurisdiction of First Nations communities. The attempts of non-native society to impose controls on First Nations governments, principally through the imposition of the Canadian Charter, are rejected on the basis they continue to perpetuate a colonial philosophy. However, adopting a theory of 'rejuvenated universalism,' and on the basis of a dialogue with three native controlled child welfare agencies in British Columbia, it is argued that agreement on fundamental standards of child welfare could be forged across native and non-native cultures. It is suggested these standards should be guaranteed in a Children's Charter binding all governments in Canada. A Children's Charter which has been developed through fully inclusive cross-cultural dialogue, and which consequently reflects the values of all the various cultures, would provide an essential mechanism for the external evaluation and review of child welfare agencies in Canada, whether native or non-native, according to their own freely accepted values and principles. / Law, Peter A. Allard School of / Graduate