Justice elusive for survivors of institutional abuse in Canada

Justice elusive for survivors of institutional abuse in Canada

JAMES MCCARTEN

Canadian Press
April 15, 2003

http://www.restoringdignity.org/news/0010.html

TORONTO (CP) - Survivors of institutional abuse in Canada have for years been thwarted in the quest for true justice by a legal system plagued with prejudice and inexperience, experts say. The civil and criminal justice systems in Canada are learning at glacial speed how to fairly treat cases of systemic sexual and physical abuse, said Loretta Merritt, a lawyer and specialist in institutional abuse cases. "The law is inherently
backward-looking, because it's based on the common law system of precedents - you look at old cases to determine what you should do in the present case," Merritt said. "It evolves very, very slowly." Merritt represents dozens of men who allege being beaten, brutalized and sexually abused during their time at government-run training schools in Ontario between the early 1960s and early 1980s. More than 30 have already filed lawsuits against the Ontario government, with several more in the process of preparing their cases, Merritt said. The allegations are also the subject of a lengthy provincial police probe; more than 3,000 former training school residents across Canada have been interviewed to date.

But regardless of whether charges are laid - and even that's far from certain at this point, investigators warn - victims are likely to be less than satisfied with the results of their pursuit of justice. In Quebec, victims and their advocates have been struggling for more than a decade to win justice for the Duplessis orphans - poor or illegitimate children who were abused in the 1940s and 1950s after being declared mentally disabled by the province and placed in church-run institutions. "In the justice system, there was no awareness of this, no experience, no precedents," said Yves Manseau, co-ordinator of the victims' rights group Mouvement Action
Justice. "It was like a wasteland."

Courts in Canada are also struggling with the issue of causation: accurately determining to what extent historical sex abuse affected the life of a victim, said Merritt - especially, as is the case with training school victims, if they were having a hard time before they arrived. As a result, it's next to impossible to determine what constitutes a fair settlement, she added. "You can't say they had perfect lives and that every problem they've had since training school is attributable solely to training school."

Merritt and others who specialize in institutional abuse are awaiting a ruling from the Supreme Court of Canada that they hope will clarify the causation issue and clear the way for fairer settlements. Prior to 1990,
when the true extent of the systemic sex abuse that went on at institutions across Canada was just becoming known, settlements were often a pittance: anywhere from $500 to $2,000.

Today, damages for pain and suffering are capped in Canada, Merritt said: the most anyone who suffers the worst kind of "catastrophic injury" can get is $292,000. "Sex assaults rarely reach that cap," she said. "They get to $200,000, maybe." The courts also struggle to deal fairly with criminal charges that are based on allegations from victims who end up as career criminals, drug addicts or both - people whose credibility on the witness stand is easy to destroy. Often, it turns into a cruel Catch-22: the abuse itself leads to a life of crime or a drug or alcohol problem, the very things that end up hurting a victim's chances of being believed in court.

"If you take the typical test for establishing a witness's credibility, and apply it to an abuse survivor, it doesn't work," Merritt said. "Take the traditional legal principles and tests and apply them to sexual abuse cases, and they don't result in fair and just results."

Manseau tells a similar story of victims, many of whom come from society's lowest strata, complaining of being mistreated by both police investigators and prosecutors alike. "The way they've been treated by the police and the Crown attorneys is really terrible," he said. "You see a lot of comments - and I still see it - that the victims were all uneducated persons, they had some personal problems, some were almost illiterate - you could see a lot of prejudice against the victims."

Dwight Wadel, 63, who worked as a housemaster at White Oaks Village, a training school for boys aged eight to 12 near Hagersville, Ont., in the 1960s and 1970s, was acquitted in August 2001 on 15 sex-related charges. In his 194-page ruling, Justice Walter Stayshyn said he simply couldn't accept the stories of abuse told by five former White Oaks residents who testified as Crown witnesses.

One of them had a criminal record with more than 200 different convictions; another was serving a life sentence for two murders. "Has such an unsavoury witness or witnesses invented or stretched their evidence for personal gain, or are they motivated by more ethical persuasions?" Stayshyn wrote. "I am not satisfied to the degree necessary that I can accept the evidence of the complainants."

One of those complainants, Paul Waltenberry, had difficulty getting his own family to believe his tales of abuse. In a recent interview, Waltenberry's mother, Sandra, said her son was 11 or 12 and a chronic troublemaker when he was shipped off to White Oaks in the late 1960s. Shortly thereafter, she said, he began to complain that he'd been sexually abused - an allegation she admitted she had a hard time believing. "Do you want me to be honest with you? No," she said when asked whether she believed her own son. Then: "Of course, he could be telling the truth ... I don't know."

Canada's justice system needs to figure out how to deal with cases of institutional abuse, because they're not going to go away, Merritt warned. "We're still in the infancy of these cases coming out in large numbers."

Systems of Control – The Global Legacy of Institutional Child Abuse

Roch Longueépée - Founder & CEO, Restoring Dignity (Formerly Internations' Justice Federation)
Public address on Child abuse in institutions
Ottawa Marriott, Otawa, Ontario Canada
Friday, September 10, 2004

Download audio here: http://restoringdignity.org/systems.mp3

Distinguished Guests, members of Reach Canada, Ladies and Gentlemen. I want to express my gratitude to each of you for joining me today. My name is Roch Longueépée, Founder and President of Internations' Justice Federation based in Halifax , Nova Scotia , Canada . The organization, currently being developed, advocates change in the standards of restitution respecting institutional child abuse and in the child protection standards involving current and future generations of children.
My passion for this work is deeply rooted in my own personal experience. Though I am an advocate for change on this issue, I am also a survivor.
I am not alone. I am one of the many survivors worldwide. We are the victims of childhood exploitation and abuse. We are the former street children. We are the former children of war. We are orphans and victims of institutional child abuse. Our childhoods have been taken from us by those entrusted to protect and care for us. In the wake of that abuse, came poverty, homelessness, corruption, cultural eradication, mutilations, genocide and death. These institutions have built their future on our misfortunes.
While the mental health and deafness issue is necessarily and properly the chief topic here this week, I want to emphasize from the outset that I believe that we have far more critical issues, which now face us. As an advocate on the issue of institutional child abuse, I work with a wide range of groups and cultures. Among them is the deaf culture. The issue of institutional child abuse involves, in all respects, marginalized groups and individuals. I want to first tell you today that I am not deaf. Nor am I versed on the issues of deaf culture. It is, however, my hope that I will help each of you to understand how the cause I represent affects the community of which you are a part.
It is in this context that I wish to address you today. I speak to you not as a victim of institutional child abuse but as a survivor who is trying to move past these experiences.
It is only fitting today that I begin with a story of one of the most notorious cases involving the deaf community. It was 1991, when a scandal of child abuse at British Columbia 's Jericho Hill School for the deaf and blind made headlines across Canada . Jericho Hill School , a residential school, based in Vancouver , British Columbia , Canada , would become the first case of intuitional child abuse involving deaf children and one of Canada 's most infamous.
Over the first few years of its operation, Jericho Hill School was rumored to be one of the best residential schools in the world for deaf children.
Jericho Hill School : its mission was to provide the best education to deaf and blind children anywhere. Over the decades of its operation it would see children from all over North America . Sadly, those who constructed the physical structure did not see the isolation the children of Jericho would face, the isolation of deafness. For many deaf children leaving their families and familiar surroundings, their new home would only add to that isolation.
Behind the walls of Jericho lay a dark secret history of physical and sexual abuse the sexual abuse of young children ignored by the government ministries until the abused would become abusers and the abuse that would infect students at Jericho for decades. Victims would go on to abuse other children until the abuse became a right of passage and thus became normal. The inaction of governments responsible for the school would once again see new horrors surface in newer realities. Outside the walls of Jericho , former students would go on to offend as adults. The cycles of abuse would find its way into victims' family homes and communities. While living in a group home, one former male resident stabbed and killed another over sex. The waves of pain would continue for new students at Jericho , their families and communities. By the time the cycles of abuse had reached the communities at large, rape charges against former Jericho Hill Students would bring police investigations back to Jericho Hill School . Police investigators would find incidents of abuse at Jericho as far back as 1945.
Fintan O'Toole, an Irish reporter for the Irish times, said it best when he wrote;
"The state to put it crudely had been remarkably good at taking vulnerable, neglected and abused children and turning them into drug addicts, prostitutes, and criminals."
Society, sadly, has a tendency to label those victims who became abusers as ‘evil'. I do not believe in evil, at least not in the conventional sense of the word. If there is any evil here, it is the omissions and commissions of government and organizations responsible for these horrors. In a recent landmark case involving the Roman Catholic Church clergy sexual abuse scandal, Ontario Superior Court Justice John Kerr summed this issue up best. In this particular case, the diocese attempted to counter sue a victim who had abused his younger brothers. The diocese claimed the victim turned abuser was partly responsible for the suffering of his siblings when he sexually abused them, but Kerr said he found no merit in that argument. He said "Blaming John for his assaults would be similar to blaming Frankenstein's monster for his actions, rather than attributing its behavior to the scientist who created it."
The deaf community is not the only group identified in these abuse scandals. Matters of institutional child abuse also affect other groups in this country and around the world. Yet when we think of this term we often think of institutions like Jericho Hill School for the deaf and blind. However, the meaning of institutional child abuse does not simply refer to ‘residential schools'.
Child abuse itself is nothing new in society. In fact, research shows issues of child abuse as far back as 2000 BC. The word abuse in and of itself refers to a point of measure. Abuse can be seen as anything, which is in excess and/or causes harm as a result of that excess. Even well known poets wrote of the disgraceful societal value placed on children. William Blake once wrote in his work piece entitled “ Jerusalem ”: ” And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills? /And was Jerusalem builded here / Among these dark satanic mills?”
What Blake is referring to here is the child labor in industrialized pulp mills during his times. Dictionaries define the word ‘institution' as “ That which institutes or instructs; a textbook; a system of elements or rules; an institute.
An established or organized society or corporation; an establishment, especially of a public character, or affecting a community; a foundation; as, a literary institution; a charitable institution; also, a building or the buildings occupied or used by such organization.” When referring to an institution, we should also think of any government, religious, secular, or charitable body charged with the care of children. The meaning of the term has been misinterpreted for many years for takes on a more literal meaning as society begins to grapple with the impacts of institutional child abuse.
In March 2000, the Law Commission of Canada produced a Report to Parliament entitled “Restoring Dignity: Responding to Child Abuse in Canadian Institutions”. The Report provides recommendations for redressing child abuse in Canadian Institutions. This report, while good, is not thorough. Little research has been conducted on institutional child abuse, in part, due to the lack of an accurate definition.
From a proper context of definition comes a history, which spans over four centuries. It marked a time of the British Empire , a time when marginalized groups like children were defined as ‘the lower social orders'. During the late 1600's, Christian charities, governments, and groups sought out a means of ‘seeding the empire' of the ‘undesirables'. Among the schemes introduced were the child migration schemes involving the dominion countries under the rule of the British Empire . Australia 's Alan Gill, author of "Orphans of the Empire, writes:
"Child Migration was devised as offering underprivileged children a 'new start' in a fresh country. It was also a way for Britain to solve its social problems. It was a means of 'seeding the empire', and was pursued with missionary zeal. The children were not adopted out, nor were they, in the usual sense of the word, fostered. Though government sponsored, the sending and receiving agencies were for the most part Christian charities who shared this goal and saw their work as inherently noble. “The receiving Countries shared Britain 's enthusiasm. The desire of the Dominions - in particular Australia , Canada , and Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe ) to increase their white, preferably Anglo-Saxon populations coincided with the desire of the mother country to rid itself of excess children of the lower social orders." Evidentially, Canada is predominately Anglo-Saxon. The values that flowed from that time period are very much inherent in Canadian Society. The rippling effect of these values represents our governing political systems. Most people are so hopelessly dependant on that system that they will fight to protect it.
As Western civilization evolved, the value systems of these times laid the foundation for human rights abuses around the world. The centuries that followed would see those value systems inflict abuses upon minority groups, children and marginalized groups.
As of the date of the Law Commission of Canada's report to Parliament, entitled “Restoring Dignity: Responding to Child Abuse in Canadian Institutions”, Canada, during the decade prior to March 2000, over 5,210 victims filed claims of physical and sexual abuse, cultural eradication, sterilizations, and genocide, involving over 72 residential institutions. Many children also died due to the severe negligence and physical abuse they received at the hands of their caregivers.
During World War two, the world saw some of the most horrific crimes against humanity committed by Adolph Hitler and members of his German Nazi party who commonly practiced human experiments, such as eugenics. It is of particular interest to note that before we came to be at war with Nazi Germany, Canada did not criticize the Nazi party for these crimes. Why not?
Worldwide there are mass gravesites of children buried in unmarked graves, their identities unknown. In Ireland , the industrial schools are embroiled in scandals of physical and sexual abuse and the mysterious deaths of children. On the grounds of the Artane Industrial School , located in the county of Artane , Dublin , Ireland , lay a mass gravesite of children buried one on top of another in unmarked graves. It is estimated that around 120 children died in these institutions between the 1930s and 1970s.
Children would also become pawns for governments, agencies, and law enforcement collaborating with groups like Germany 's notorious Nazi Party who would use them as study subjects for scientific research. One example in Canada is the case of the Duplessis orphans based in Quebec , Canada . The Duplessis' Orphans case is widely recognized as the largest case of institution-based youth abuse in Canadian history. ( http://members.tripod.com/~rootsunknown/intro1.htm ) There are about 6000 survivors, who as children were put into orphanages and psychiatric institutions.
“The premier of the province during that time was Maurice Duplessis, thus the name. The survivors claim that while in institutions run by Catholic religious orders, they suffered harsh treatment and sexual abuse. It is believed that most of the "orphans" were in fact children born to unmarried parents. Since this was during the 1930's, '40s and '50s they were left in the care of religious orders that operated orphanages. In some cases those establishments were transformed into health-care facilities and in other cases the children were shipped from orphanages to existing hospitals. At these hospitals that were also run by religious orders, the Duplessis' Orphans claim doctors wrongfully labelled many children as mentally deficient. The reason for all this was that Quebec could obtain more federal funds for health-care facilities than for schools and orphanages. More money for Quebec meant more money for the religious orders. “By being labelled mentally deficient the children were given treatments such as being strapped into straightjackets, electroshock therapy, excessive medication, detainment in cells and even lobotomies. Their stories of physical and sexual abuse are frightful. ( http://members.tripod.com/~rootsunknown/intro1.htm )
The victims also claim to have witnessed the murders of other residents. In some cases child victims were so severely neglected they died as a result. The child witnesses live to this day with the horror of these last images. Many of the victims have never been found.
For those orphans who survived, when no more financial gain could be achieved by keeping them, they are (sic) released from their dreadful existence behind those institution walls. With no education and false medical records they were unprepared for adult life. Even traces of their families have been snatched from them. ( http://members.tripod.com/~rootsunknown/intro1.htm )
While cases like the Duplessis orphans were contained within one province, other offending groups were globalized. The Christian Brother movement under the Roman Catholic Church ran orphanages throughout the world. This movement was among one of the worst offending groups involved in institutional child abuse matters in history. The Christian Brother movement's offending history spanned over four centuries and inflicted abuse upon victims by the thousands. Fortunately, the Christian Brother movement is now defunct.
In the wake of cases like these, have been findings of mass gravesites of children, their identities unknown. In Canada and worldwide, many cases remain unaccounted for, and those responsible go untried for their crimes.
In Canada other forms of human rights violations against children often called ‘eugenics' were carried out as recently as the 1970's and 80's. Eugenics is defined as ‘ the study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding.' Among the qualifying candidates identified for the movement were the deaf. The history of deaf culture itself has been a long and arduous struggle for many generations.
Two weeks ago, I received a report from an unnamed individual on eugenics in Nova Scotia , Canada . To date, there has been no public knowledge of the scandal. The report is scathing and based on well-founded evidence. The mere fact that such a practice would exist as recently as the late 1980's should say something to all of us here. The problems of the past are not over. Governments and society often make comments like “That was a long time ago.” “That does not happen anymore.” “Or how does institutional child abuse relate to the present?” Many of you here today are no doubt familiar with the apartheid of South Africa . You are all, as well, familiar with the Canadian reservation schemes. What you may not know is that the apartheid of South Africa was modeled from the Canadian reservation schemes.
Society is commonly noted for believing that violence of this extreme does not exist. Violence does not end. It only assumes new forms. It is the violence of inaction, indifference and slow decay.
When you teach one person to hate and fear another, when you teach that an individual or group is lesser because of their race, beliefs or the rights they pursue, when you teach that those who disagree with you threaten your freedom or your livelihood or your family, then you also learn to see others not as equal citizens but as enemies, only to be conquered and ruled. This is the reality of the Canadian connection to the Apartheid of South Africa.
Offending institutions are indifferent to institutional child abuse victims. When those of us around the world first cried out for what we had lost, our adversaries responded by reducing our pain and suffering to statistical trends and numbers.
Offending institutions have often erected 'feel good' memorials to conceal the true measure of their crimes against vulnerable, neglected and abused children, denying their victims a dignified burial. They have authored apologies only to reduce their liability .
Offending groups stigmatized their victims with labels. This is a façade to protect dishonorable institutions. Governments expend more resources defending themselves than they do addressing the problem. For decades, government, religious, and secular institutions around the globe have possessed the ability, but not the will, to redress the omissions and commissions they have committed against society's marginalized groups. In a recent case this summer, eighty eight year old Flora Merrick, an aboriginal living in a hospital in Portage la Prairie , Manitoba , Canada was awarded $1,500.00 in the Federal Indian Residential Schools Resolution Department's alternative dispute resolution Program. Ms. Merrick was physically assaulted at a government run residential school. The Canadian Federal government appealed her abuse case. Subsequently, the government was criticized for its hypocrisy.
The Law Commission of Canada in its report states that the redress or healing process must be both qualitative and quantitative. Many victims, who file actions against institutions via civil law suits or criminal, often complain that the experience was like being abused and exploited all over again.
In many of the institutional abuse cases, the alleged institutions frequently conducted ‘internal investigations'. The results of these internal investigations did, in almost every case; result in the alleged being exonerated. In the cases where governments are accused, a criminal investigation is launched by police agencies, only after considerable pressure from victims. The result is usually the same: no perpetrators charged or prosecuted.
In the cases of the police conducting criminal investigations, we have to remember who their employer is, the alleged perpetrator, the government. It is also important to note that police agencies are required by statute to report their findings to the alleged perpetrator, the government. Additionally in many cases police and other professionals have not had the proper training or experience to investigate institutional child abuse matters. The Jericho Hill school case was a prime example of this. Police investigators did not understand the culture of the deaf language. Nor did the investigators understand the impact of the abuse, which infected all the children at Jericho Hill School . Police investigators in a number of interviews would be interviewing students as a victim one day and interviewing the same student as an offender the next. Always, investigators were approaching the case from an adversarial standpoint. This is what they call democracy.
To date there have been no studies done on the results of these redress programs, whether they are civil settlements or government alternative dispute resolution programs. There is also no accurate record of the victim numbers in this country. This is in part due to the fact that we are barely into the preliminary stages of case numbers. As a survivor of institutional child abuse, I can offer you some insight, from my own experience. The lawyers I speak with around Canada who have represented victims say that to date, the redress process is failing. The victims I speak with concur. I concur. The compensation programs do not adequately address the issues of survivors.
In the end, governments spend considerably higher amounts of money defending themselves when in almost every case they are clearly found guilty. It is hard to expect justice when the offending party makes all the rules, controls all the evidence, and has infinitely more resources. What is also at issue is that we are applying common laws to a problem, which does not equate fairly or justly to these laws. Class actions in Canada only first began in 1978. The lack of experience in this area again slows the legal process.
In the Jericho Hill school case, we lose two percent of the population per year while we pursue justice for the victims. They die. The Jericho Hill case has been active for over fifteen years. This again is also a government tactic, delay to compromise redress for victims. Ultimately, victims give up, settle for pennies or die.
Governments, who do not settle these cases with adequate redress, do injustice to us all. What good will come if after a few years these plaintiffs end up back in the system, via welfare, mental health services, or the criminal Justice System? If Governments are to spend tax dollars on these cases, they must be accountable to the average Canadian. It is only logical.
Governments too often in these cases refuse to address the problem. They manufacture statutes of limitations that prevent victims from having their day in court. They refuse to make mandatory reporting an issue. They do not create a national registry for those in the helping professions caring for vulnerable groups. They author poor public policy and starve good agencies of resources and money. They advocate cover-ups and internal procedures to discourage future claims of abuse. Government paid and funded lawyers terrify abuse victims from coming forward. Then, there are the spineless people in bureaucracy and health sectors who have not done their job.
In all good conscience, governments must recognize that the laws and values of present governing systems have contributed to the detriment of vulnerable, neglected children and marginalized groups. The appropriate and right thing for governments to do is to begin drafting legislation with victims, which will deal with institutional abuse both for the principles of prevention, and to redress the wrongs of the past.
United Nations' Secretary-General Kofi Annan, in his opening statement to the General Assembly, addressing the children of the world said,
``We, the grown-ups, have failed you deplorably,'' he said, noting that 33 percent of youngsters suffer from malnutrition before the age of five, 25 percent are not immunized, nearly 20 percent don't attend school and far too many ``have seen violence that no child should ever see. We the adults, must reverse this.''
Governments and society must likewise recognize that the current political and justice systems have only served to perpetuate the problems of the past. Too often helping professions of those groups and experts charged with the care of vulnerable groups and individuals label people unjustly. They seek punitive measures to address behaviours their systems have created. Human beings are debased in the beginning stages of their development and then sent into society without the means to integrate into society.
Our whole nation is continually degraded by these policies and practices, which ignore our common humanity.
Many of the victims I speak with in this country and around the world all live in abject poverty. Many have mental health disorders. Many who are functional still suffer a long road of relationship after relationship because their behaviours often alienate people. Many do not have family or support bases. Many are homeless.
In 1969 the Professor of Australia's Psychological Medicine at Monash University , Dr. Ironside, stated at a child abuse seminar:
"Future social historians will look back on this age as one in which, in the affluent societies at least, children were paradoxically deprived of their birthright in spite of increasing knowledge of the developmental requirements for healthy emotional, mental and personality growth. The future social historian will also note that legislation aimed at improving services for young children in need not only failed its praiseworthy objective but, paradoxically, contributed to the further deprivation for vulnerable children."
While we seek to enact just measures of restitution, how shall we price someone's childhood? The reality is, we cannot. However, if we are to move in the direction of redressing wrongs, we can begin only, by engendering a social conscience.
There is redemption which can still be found. If governments were to admit and account for their wrong doings in institutional child abuse, then we could look to other countries where there is war, economic slow downs, famine and aids. These countries will, without doubt, erect institutions to care for neglected, orphaned and vulnerable children. Canada could turn to these countries and say, “Here are the mistakes we made. Learn from them.”
The message I bring to you today is this. We are not just dealing with problems of the past; we are dealing with problems of the present and future. Those problems do not just affect the victims. They affect us all.
Now, more than ever these victims of abuse need all the help we can give them. And it is the responsibility of all of us involved with them, and others of similar circumstances; to do all we can to support their personal growth.
Great harm has been done to victims and survivors. We have suffered great losses. In our grief and anger we have found our cause and our wish for future generations. This wretched course of history must never happen again. We are at war with offending institutions. As in any war, there are real life casualties. In any age it is said change is often met with great resistance.
There are two types of people in this world – those who make history and those who read about it. This I tell you with all certainty – these victims have already begun to make history. Worldwide, these survivors are fast becoming the makers of change on this issue. They deserve nothing less than our profound respect and gratitude. Would you please stand with me now and join me in acknowledging their contributions?
Let us seek to exercise our freedoms:
- The freedom of speech
- The right to express and communicate ideas
- The right to recall governments to their duties and obligations
- The right to affirm our membership and allegiance to the body politic, to society
- The power to be heard
The power to share in the decisions of government, which shape our lives, everything that makes our lives worthwhile: family, work, education, and home.
Let us endorse, both in word and in deed, the United Nations' Conventions on the Rights of the Child, now ratified by more than 190 countries. More countries have ratified the Convention than any other human rights treaty in history.
Let us resolve never to yield to the cruelties and obstacles of obsolete dogmas and outworn slogans, nor cling to illusions of security. Friend and foe alike, we each share in the investment of peaceful progress. With a good conscience as our guide, may all our endeavors make way for a world where the strong are just and the weak safe.

Families, Communities and Peoples: Redress and Healing for Secondary Victims of Institutional Abuse

Nathalie Des Rosiers President, Law Commission of Canada

Remarks for a speech at the 2nd Annual National Summit on Institutional Liability for Sexual Assault and Abuse luncheon held February 15, 2001.

Thank you for inviting me to participate in this very important conference on a subject which society and the legal system are often ill-prepared to acknowledge or respond to, namely the impact of sexual or physical abuse of children. I was asked to ``make the case for compensating secondary victims". Indeed, it is interesting that one would have to "make the case" for such compensation. The first part of this address will attempt to explain why it is even necessary to make such a case - why the civil justice system is suspicious of these claims. I will then proceed to make the case, psychologically, economically, and politically for compensating secondary victims and conclude with the challenges of attempting to do so.

My remarks are obviously inspired by the work of the Law Commission of Canada on institutional abuse. Its report, Restoring Dignity: Responding to Child Abuse in Canadian Institutions was released last spring and was in response to a reference from the Minister of Justice.

Before I move to the substance of the Commission's recommendations, I will say a few words about the Law Commission of Canada and its work and perspective in order to put my remarks in context.

The Law Commission of Canada

The Law Commission of Canada is an independent federal agency whose mandate is to provide advice on, improvements to, and modernization and reform of the law of Canada. It has defined its mission as a commitment to engaging Canadians in the renewal of the law to ensure that it is relevant, responsive, effective, equally accessible to all, and just. In approaching its mandate, the Commission is guided by a number of important principles:

• that its work be open, inclusive and accessible to all Canadians;
• that it view the law and the legal system in a broad social and economic context;
• that it be responsive and accountable by working in partnership with a wide range of interested individuals and groups;
• that it be innovative in its research methods; and
• that it take into account the impact of the law on different individuals and groups in making its recommendations.

Research Topics

The Commission believes it must look first at social problems as they present themselves to Canadians, and not be limited by the traditional legal and jurisdictional boundaries. From an understanding of these "real world" problems, the Commission can then examine how the law, understood broadly, is hindering or could facilitate their resolution. Consequently, the Commission has developed a research agenda based on four complementary themes: personal, social, economic and governance relationships. These themes are not meant to categorize discrete issues. Most issues could be examined from any one of these four relational perspectives. Rather, the themes represent a different emphasis in approaching issues.

Research Methodology

To determine the specific issues it will examine, the Commission seeks the views of Canadians. Initially, it conducted a broad public consultation to develop its strategic agenda of research. It then established an Advisory Council -- 24 volunteer members from across Canada - who bring a rich variety of experience and perspectives to the advice they offer the Commission. The Advisory Council meets twice a year to provide strategic guidance to the five commissioners regarding the projects that the Commission is considering undertaking. Members of the Council serve as an important network for the Commission, connecting it to communities, regions and points of view to which it might not otherwise have regular access.

The Commission selects research topics that it believes are of fundamental concern to Canadians. It approaches all of its work with a view to ensuring that it is multidisciplinary, consultative and, where possible, includes partnership. The Commission seeks to ensure a multidisciplinary perspective in a number of ways. It directs research contract opportunities to a variety of academic disciplines, such as sociology, economics, and psychology, as well as to lawyers, notaries and legal scholars. It seeks partnerships with different policy research agencies, with community-based organizations and other groups whose expertise complements the work of the Commission.

The Reference on Institutional Child Abuse

In 1997, the Minister of Justice asked the Commission to study the ways in which government should respond to institutional child abuse. What should be done for survivors of sexual and physical abuse? The Commission approached its work on this reference with the same philosophy that it applies to all its other research. It attempted to understand the problem in its social context, and to measure the consequences and the impact of the different legal mechanisms on victims, their families and communities. In the case of survivors of residential schools, it also examined the impact of institutional abuse on Aboriginal nations.

The Commission hired several teams of researchers who looked at both the international models and the range of options tried in Canada. The research involved interviewing survivors, and consulting with a wide range of individuals and groups, religious organizations, the Aboriginal communities, lawyers, therapists and community groups.

The report and the video Just Children were released in March 2000. The report had this to say about the needs of families and communities:

There are many ways in which members of a survivor's family can be affected by institutional child abuse. Some parents, particularly those whose children had special needs, sent their children away to school willingly, believing it was in the child's best interests to do so. In many instances, these parents did not discover until years later that their children had been abused. Some Deaf children with hearing parents believed that their parents knew of the abuse that was taking place at school, but sent them back anyway. As a result, these children became alienated from their parents and blamed them for the abuse they suffered. Their parents, in turn, now feel guilty for having failed to protect their children. In some cases the families are able to reconcile, but not always.

For Aboriginal parents who may have felt they had no choice but to send their children to residential schools, the guilt may be compounded. Often, the parents themselves had been residential school students. Therefore, they knew what experiences might await their children. However, where no schooling was available locally, and where there was a threat of fine or imprisonment for failure to surrender their children, parents may not have been in a position to resist.

Children who were physically and sexually abused while away from home frequently brought the effects of that abuse back to their families. Some abused children became abusers themselves, directing their violent behaviour at parents, siblings, partners and even their own children. Family members may suffer without even being aware of the abuser's own previous abuse in residential institutions.

In addition to experiencing the effects of physical and sexual abuse, the families of Aboriginal survivors also suffered the alienation of children who lost their language and their cultural heritage at residential schools. For these reasons, survivors and their family members share many of the same needs. Spiritually, they would benefit from an acknowledgement of the consequences of abuse, and an apology. Counselling to better understand and cope with the behaviour of survivors and to deal with harms survivors may have caused them is also a key need felt by many family members. Finally, because they have lived first-hand the spill-over effects of abuse, members of survivors' families are especially attuned to the need to see preventive measures and public awareness campaigns put into effect.

Communities are also affected by child sexual abuse :

The damage caused by institutional child abuse, particularly abuse that has continued over a period of years or through more than one generation, extends beyond the individual survivors and their families: it affects entire communities. Communities are groups of people who live in a particular area or who identify with each other on the basis of common interests or common characteristics. In this sense, the idea of community would include, for example, a neighbourhood, an Inuit village, an Aboriginal nation, the Deaf community, or the community known as the "Children of Duplessis".

A community can be affected by institutional child abuse in profound and subtle ways, directly and indirectly. The difficulties experienced by the Deaf community, for instance, have been significant. They are exacerbated by the relative isolation of community members from resources, such as therapy, that are available in the hearing community. In a community where virtually all members have passed through the same institution, and many have been subjected to serious levels of abuse, in particular sexual abuse, it is hard to locate where an effective healing process might begin.

Small or tightly-knit communities are especially vulnerable to the ripple effects of institutional child abuse. They must integrate victims back into a community that may already contain victim-offenders. Even when the survivor's destructive behaviour is turned inward, communities will have to cope with the consequences. They must rebuild a sense of confidence in the community as a safe place for disclosure and healing. They must repair the rifts that have been caused by recriminations among community members where some survivors have themselves become perpetrators of abuse. They must replace (in the case of Aboriginal communities) or reform (in the case of the Deaf community) the institutions where the abuse took place, because the educational function performed by those institutions remains necessary and important. A population disproportionately prone to substance abuse and exhibiting suicidal tendencies puts enormous pressure on the healing resources of small, close-knit or isolated communities. Because many survivors simply do not have the education or life skills to become self-sufficient, this, in turn, places additional economic stress on the community.

Small or close-knit communities have needs much like those of families. Remembrance and acknowledgement of their on-going suffering is a first step to their empowerment. They may also need financial assistance to hire community workers and therapists to provide the support services and programs necessary to overcome the social and economic side effects of child abuse. These programs can also increase public awareness and promote prevention as a community goal.

On the subject of compensation for secondary victims, the report is therefore quite clear: any attempt to redress institutional abuse must look at the impact of the abuse on the victim's family, his or her community and, in the case of residential schools, on the Aboriginal nations to which he or she belongs. The Commission's report speaks to more than financial compensation however and this is an aspect which I want to emphasize. It is not only about money - neither for the primary victim nor for the family or the community. In addition to financial compensation, the list of survivor needs that emerged from the Commission's research includes acknowledgement, accountability, apology, access to therapy and education, memorializing and prevention.

The report, therefore, is about detailing how different legal mechanisms can respond to the various needs of victims and of their families and communities. It proposes changes to several mechanisms, the civil justice system among others, and encourages governments to move toward alternative dispute mechanisms that offer more flexibility than civil actions in attempting to respond to victims' needs.

I now move to make the case for compensation of secondary victims and want to start with a reflection on why it is even necessary to make such a case.

1. Why the civil justice system is reluctant to compensate secondary victims

The unwillingness of the system to compensate secondary victims is rooted in part in its focus on individuality and a denial of the importance of relationships for human beings. The system's focus on individuality is pervasive. Casebooks tend to imagine and present one tort victim - who wants to be compensated as an individual. The story of the family or the community is rarely told. In fact, it is as a marginalized issue that compensation under provisions analogous to the Fatal Accidents Act is studied. It is only reluctantly that the system has accepted that the victim's family (defined by the Fatal Accidents Act or now the Family Law Act for Ontario) has a right to make a claim for damages. This focus on individuality is also demonstrated through the evolution of class actions: unless forced by legislation, the system would deny commonality and force people into arguing individual fault, harm and liability.

In short, the justice system does not like groups. It certainly does not like group litigation. It has therefore managed to focus most of its theories of compensation, or even of punishment and retribution, on individuals.

However, in reality, individuals are involved in relationships. They do not live in isolation and their connectedness to others is affected by harm of whatever nature. This recognition may be difficult to articulate in a civil justice system that values individuals first, and understands their wishes through the mechanism of legal representation. One lawyer per client: This mechanism of individual representation may be ill-suited to group representation, whether of families, or communities. I will come back to this issue later.

To the reluctance of the civil justice system to recognize groups and relationships, one must add its deep suspicion of psychological harm. A suspicion that is being challenged and conquered little by little by cases about abuse, but remains embedded in the system.

A third aspect of the reluctance of the system to be considered is the extreme concern about the possibility toward unlimited liability. As a civilian, I was always struck by the desire of the common law to establish categories for recovery. For a civilian, the idea of categorizing victims as primary and secondary does not inspire confidence. As you may know, the Civil Code states that if one causes damage to another, one has to pay... Hence, initially, the civil regime used causation as the way to curtail liability as opposed to attempting to define, in advance, the categories of people entitled to compensation. There has been some evolution in the civil law system as well and the distinction between primary and secondary victims which is now used, but there is little attempt to define the categories - spouses, children, and parents - in the civil law regime. It is simply a matter of proving that one has suffered damage, albeit indirectly.

The difference between secondary and primary victims is therefore rooted in the common law's fear of toward unlimited liability which seems to border on paranoia. I want to suggest that this fear does not sufficiently take into account the incredible financial and emotional barriers that exist to limit liability. The question to be asked is whether, in seeking to prevent unlimited liability, the system has not screened out too many meritorious claims. Striking the right balance is at the heart of our reflections on law and particularly at the heart of law reform efforts. We must always consider the impact of the invisible aspects of the system, and ask whether the absent players, the potential plaintiffs who do not even seek legal advice, should continue to be left out. This is one of the difficult questions for law reform in this area.

In light of these roots of scepticism in the civil justice system, it is incumbent on to reflect on the consequences of refusing to appreciate that people have networks of emotional support and live in relationships, which are affected by the harm caused by the tortfeasor. We must consider the case to be made for compensating secondary victims.

ll. The Case

The recognition that people, victims included, do not live alone and that the legal system cannot treat them in isolation is crucial to the work of the Commission, on this subject and on others. Limiting one's approach to responding only to needs of an individual means that you miss a large part of what the human condition is all about. Nobody is an island. In joy and in pain, human beings often join together.

I will try to make the case for compensation on three grounds, although there are many others. Let me explain why (I believe that) psychology, economics and even politics may support a case for compensation of families and communities.

1. Psychology

"Je suis seul avec ma solitude" -- I am alone with my loneliness, sang Georges Moustaki in the 70s. Loneliness is the source of much anxiety and suffering. The importance of trust, of connections, of communication, or developing a sense of belonging and of connectedness to others is well documented in the psychological literature. This is what psychological health is all about.

Refusing to acknowledge this reality in the legal system seems to deny a fundamental need which comes with a cost -- a tremendous psychological cost. Suddenly, and lawyers representing survivors will recognize this, the plaintiff is alone in the face of the legal system. It is her case. Sometimes, this may be empowering for her. At times, it can distort the networks of support that she has created for herself. In one of the first articles on representing survivors of sexual abuse, Kimberley Crnich¹ argued that survivors should be told that the lawsuit may break up their marriage, their families... This was the price to pay.

My question is whether this is a necessary price to pay. Psychological damage to individual claimants and their families and communities hurts us all. If the process of civil justice excludes or minimizes the role of networks of support, it loses the ability to adequately respond to the needs of litigants. The invisible family and community are left in the cold and denied the resources that our system can offer.

Further, think of the incredible psychological stress of the plaintiff who is awarded $500,000 only to become the target of her relatives who need money, of her family who is coping with the publicity and disruptions of the trial. Is it "her" money? Should she share it? Can she recognize their suffering? Should she have less because she does?

More and more, the psychological impact of the legal system on citizens is being studied. The American Therapeutic Jurisprudence movement is an interesting development in the literature that seeks to identify the psychological consequences of legal rules and concepts and of participating in the legal system. It posits that law should consider this psychological impact and seek to do ... less harm. Very radically, says the American Therapeutic Jurisprudence movement, people should not feel worse after their interaction with the law -- they should, if possible, feel better. It therefore invites us to ask the following questions on the subject at hand:

• How are families affected by the harm caused to one member?
• Does participation in the civil process allow for an expression of their trauma?
• Is such expression necessary to their healing? Is it better done elsewhere?
• Do family law claimants heal better than those who are excluded from participating?
  

We rarely ask these questions about our legal system, but it may be time to do so. It is no longer sufficient to rely on tradition or structural or procedural features of litigation to define the approach that law should have toward human suffering. Other disciplines may have something to offer. This brings me to the economic analysis of the question.

2. Economics

Most Law and Economics scholars reflect on the impact of negligence and compensation schemes on the tortfeasor, the insurance industry, and explore the efficiencies of the system. One question that has not been explored very much, to our knowledge, whether it matters who receives the award.

Our consultations have certainly revealed that there is a great deal of disruption in a community when one member receives a large sum of money, sometimes arbitrarily. He is the survivor whose case was heard first, whose institutional file was not lost or whose lawyer was most diligent. The community needs the money and the successful plaintiff is asked for contributions. This form of redistribution of wealth is often done on an unprincipled basis - more is given to the loudest claimant. It is also done without much help to the successful plaintiff who may need the support of the community for his or her own healing. At times, this redistribution of wealth has led the successful plaintiff to become destitute.

Structured settlements were a response to the fear that plaintiffs would become destitute because of their inability to manage large sums of money and their weakness to the pressures of the market to "spend, spend, spend". Not unlike many of us, who appreciate deductions at source and mandatory pension contributions, some plaintiffs opt for structured settlements. Is compensation for the secondary victims another tool to protect the successful plaintiff from pressures - not market pressures but social pressures, to "give, give, give"?

Would it be more efficient to compensate the community directly instead of through the plaintiff? Certainly, some Aboriginal communities have taken the position that the harm caused by sexual abuse was collective as well as individual and that denying the collective nature of the harm is incoherent and wrong. It could also be very inefficient. It could very well be that a direct contribution to the community for the harm suffered would allow for better community healing. Our consultations brought to the forefront in the context of residential schools that healing outside the community setting was not always possible and diminishes the nature of the wrong. It is one of the reasons why the Law Commission suggested that more redress programs, which offer greater possibilities of community responses, be developed. Nevertheless, there is no reason why the civil justice system could not adapt and recognize this evolution of thinking. Class actions, collective rights, and now collective harm, present the justice system with the possibility and the challenge to improve and better respond to society's needs.

3. Politics

It is rare that one argues that political developments could be helped by the justice system or that they could be a positive thing. Nevertheless, the argument presented here simply reflects one personal conclusion that I drew from my participation in the work of the Commission on institutional child abuse.

There often was a political context to institutional abuse. Our study certainly outlined that the children placed in institutions were often the poor and the marginalized - Aboriginal children, children with disabilities and economically disadvantaged children. The civil lawsuit is then a way to redress systemic failures or systemic injustices and also a way to raise the profile of the issue of abuse of children.

Disconnecting survivors from each other and from their family and community is disempowering. It is hard to see oneself as part of a "class" if the message from the system is that the harm is experienced solely as an individual.

What was also interesting is how survivors become powerful spokespersons on the issue of child abuse. This responded to their need for prevention. In that sense, they responded to the political needs of society which requires good advocates and ongoing monitoring of how society addresses the child abuse issue. Often, the recognition of connectedness to either a family or a community, is one way of identifying the breadth of the harm caused and of the "political" context of the abuse. It may allow for more engagement with the systemic nature of the needed response.

I do not want to overemphasize this point which is unusual, but I simply want to connect recognition of harm and political action because my observation was that most survivors insisted that one of their strongest needs was to see that measures were put in place to prevent harm to other children. Further, the ones who had benefited from a group experience -- the Grandview survivors, for example - had often risen to the challenge of acting as spokespersons on the issue of child abuse.

Certainly, one can make a similar observation for the Aboriginal communities that sought group solutions as well as individual compensation. The group reflection allowed them to move from the past to the future and to use their past abuse as a springboard for action so that it "never happens again".

What would be the consequences of considering compensation of secondary victims as an important and no longer a subordinate function of the civil justice system?

lll. The Consequences

I think that there is a good case to be made that compensation for secondary victims is an important function of the civil justice system. However, there is no magical solution in any area of legal development. On the positive side, one should note that courts are increasingly recognizing the pain and suffering of families. Many ADR processes do address the needs of families and even the needs of communities. This is not without problems. I allude to the problem of representation: Who is the client? Is it the family? The community? The survivor? Can we afford to provide everyone with legal representation?

Further, one has to recognize the diversity of healing strategies of survivors. Every time that one seems to approach a solution, for example, embracing alternative methods of redress, we find that there are survivors for whom this will not work. We just do not know how people heal from sexual abuse. The survivors are the experts. They are the only ones who really know what they need and they are the ones who are developing the knowledge as they struggle through the healing process.

Some survivors will argue no doubt that their families and communities ought not to be part of their own suffering. Their definition of harm does not include their families: They want redress to be personal and individual. That is the way in which they understand their healing. Painfully alone. That is a concern: The primary victim may not want his or her family involved in the lawsuit, and may not want this additional burden of hearing them testify as to why she was a bad mother, how he was a bad son, etc.

Ultimately, and this was the final conclusion of the Law Commission's report, choice is necessary. Survivors must have some choice in terms of their approach to redress because no one process meets all their needs. Survivors should also have the choice of whether to include their families in their civil process of recovery. Other avenues can be offered to families and communities. No one process, no one lawsuit is enough to fully respond to the complexities of human suffering. We must provide choice and continue to reflect on the best ways of including all those who should have a voice in the legal system.

The challenges are great and we do not have much choice: The law is there for the citizens and not for the system. It must respond to the evolving needs of its citizenry. I hope to have provided you with food for thought following this wonderful lunch and I thank you for your attention.

__________________
¹ Kimberly A. Crnich, « Redressing the Undressing: A Primer on the Representation of Adult Survivors of Childhood Sexual Abuse » (1992) 14 Women's rights Law Reporter 65.

CANADA - Nova Scotia's 'experiment' in eugenics

'Modern science has it well in hand': Nova Scotia's 'experiment' in eugenics By STEPHEN ELLIS* 30 April 2004 Canadian Legal History Dalhousie University "Behold ye simple moron, He does not give a damn, I'd hate to be a moron, Ye Gods! Perhaps I am." The Medical Society of Nova Scotia [1]] HALIFAX, NS -- IT WAS sixteen years before those fateful days in May, 1945 when the consequences of the German eugenics movement and the Nazi program of Josef Mengele could no loner be denied. On the occasion of the founding of the Brookside Training School in Nova Scotia, Dr. Samuel H. Prince [2], noted social reformer and mental hygiene society president, exemplified the tireless commitment of many of his generation of progressive activists. Progressives of this period agitated for a better world, one where science, humanism and Christian values would play a large part. There were many evils to be overcome in the early part of the twentieth century, tuberculosis, influenza, among others, and more and more, people were putting their faith in science as a way to cure society's ills. For middle-class progressives, however, no phenomenon matched in gravity the type of danger the existence of "feeble-minded" people represented in Nova Scotia. And on this November day in 1929, the campaign against the blight of "feeblemindedness" had for the most part reached a successful conclusion: a publicly-funded institution had been established to ensure this "most pernicious element" was eliminated from the arteries of the nation. [3] The Brookside Training School, one of the earliest of its kind (along with Shernfold, Orillia and Red Deer [4]), represented the high-water mark for eugenics-inspired social policy in Nova Scotia. Going back as far as 1895, the Halifax Council of Women with Mrs. J.C. Mackintosh at the helm was agitating in favour of such a measure. [5] In 1987, Dr. W.H. Hattie headed a special committee of the Medical Society of Nova Scotia to push for the segregation of the feeble-minded. [6] As Dr. Prince remarked in a speech on the occasion of the school's opening in 1929, "Such institutions are recognized as of prime importance to every nation for feeble-mindedness uncontrolled, will sap the roots of civilization itself." [7] The menace that "gravely" threatened the "social, moral and economic welfare of the province" [8] had been contained. Boiled down, eugenics is the notion that the quality of the human race can be improved through selective breeding. It is based on the assumption that individual traits are passed through heredity. Francis Galton first popularised this form of determinism in 1865: If a twentieth part of the costs and pains were spent in measures for the improvement of the human race that is spent on the improvement of the breed of horses and cattle, what a galaxy of genius might we not create! We might introduce prophets and high priests of civilization into the world as surely as we can propagate idiots by mating cretins. Men and women of the present day are, to those we might hope to bring into existence, what the pariah dogs of the streets of an Eastern town are to our own highly-bred varieties. [9] Gregor Mendel's pioneering work in the field of heredity was seen as further proof of the determinative nature of our genetic make-up. According to Callinicos: Eugenics ... asserted (1) that social structures are caused by, and therefore must be explained in terms of, biological structures, and (2) that "race", conceived as a set of fixed characteristics transmitted by inheritance, is the most important of the biological structures on which social structures are based. The obvious implication was that the main way to improve society was to encourage the racially èsuperior' to mate with each other, and to discourage èinferior' types from breeding at all. [10] For many who were persuaded by the ideas of eugenics there was no greater threat than the "feeble-minded" person. The term "feeble-minded", however, lacked a precise clinical meaning and functioned as a catch-all for those who would find themselves on the margins of society; the mentally challenged, the underachiever, the runaway, the unwed mother, children from broken homes. All fell into this class of people whose very existence undermined the harmony of society. [11] In particular, the term became popularized through the work of Dr. Henry Goddard of Vineland, New Jersey. His study related the story of one Martin Kallikak who married an attractive, but "feeble-minded" woman, and the long line of "defective" unions that resulted. The doctrine held that the "germ plasm" of mental defect was passed on from parent to child through the iron laws of heredity. [12] Maude Merrill in a 1922 article in the Dalhousie Review reflected well the tenor of the time: The Nams, the Kallikaks, the Zeros and the rest of the innumerable tribes of Ishmaelites, unearthed in our insatiable thirst for the truth about heredity, have abundantly proved that certain mental traits are characteristic of generation after generation of the same stock. [13] ... The social significance of inferior mental capacity is strikingly apparent in its intimate relation to all forms of anti-social conduct. [14] Alexander P. Reid, Dean of the Dalhousie Faculty of Medicine from 1868 to 1875 and Superintendent of the Nova Scotia Hospital for the Insane, was typical in many respects of the middle-class professionals of his time. His faith in eugenics was unwavering: Eugenics steps forward as the guide that can safely pilot it [society] to the safe harbours of health, wealth and desirable possibilities ... and points out the means by which the undesirable recession in race propagation can be controlled, nay, eliminated. [15] F.C.S. Schiller, humanist philosopher and founder of the English Eugenics Society, laid out the basics of the eugenic doctrine in an essay for the Dalhousie Review: The license society allows at present to the criminal, the insane and the feeble-minded to multiply at pleasure, and to have their worse than worthless offspring cared for at the public expense, or rather, at the expense of those who feel too heavily taxed to produce children that would yield better returns to the community [16] ... The gist may be stated in a single sentence. Society, as at present organized, wastes its good material and extirpates its better stocks, while it recruits itself from its inferior elements. It does this unconsciously and unintentionally, but at a growing rate. [17] As faith in nineteenth-century liberalism declined, social Darwinist ideas guaranteeing "survival of the fittest' ensured that eugenics was planted in very fertile soil. The belief in the right to be "well-born" had literally swept the world. In the United States sterilization laws were enacted in as many as thirty-one states and became the inspiration of the later Nazi eugenic campaign in Germany. Canada, too, took up arms against the foe from within. Alberta's sterilization laws remained on the books until 1972.18 In its forty-four years, Alberta's Sexual Sterilization Act had authorized four thousand, seven hundred and twenty-eight sterilizations, and was directed disproportionately at women, and people of aboriginal and Eastern European descent. [19] Shockingly, it has been noted that as late as 1978, hundreds of sterilizations were being carried out annually in the province of Ontario.20 Doctors were telling women seeking therapeutic abortions they had to submit to sterilization as part of a "package deal". [21] Contrary to popular belief, the tenets of eugenics in turn-of-the-century Canada were almost universally accepted and this was no less so in the province of Nova Scotia. Yet, Nova Scotia has escaped making the short list of provinces that experimented in eugenics. For most familiar with the subject, Alberta's 1928 Sexual Sterilization Act and British Columbia's five years later were the height of government intervention to stave off racial degeneration. [22] But Nova Scotia also gave eugenic or mental hygiene ideas a legislative form. After two Royal Commissions (in 1916 [23] and again in 1926 [24]), Bills 174, 84, 70 and 64 were passed into law in 1927. The same urgent concern that had preoccupied proponents of mental hygiene in other parts of North America could be seen with equal intensity in Nova Scotia. Although Nova Scotia preferred the eugenic measure of segregation rather than sterilization, the "unfit" would not be permitted to reproduce their kind [25] lest society be submerged in a flood of congenital feeblemindedness. [26] Eugenics as social policy: Canada History has now provided ample evidence that eugenics was far from a passing fancy in Canada. Some of this country's most prominent social reformers were quite naturally believers in the need for eugenic measures to protect the nation against racial degeneration. People like J.S. Woodsworth, Tommy Douglas, Charlene Whitton, Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung and Agnes McPhail, among many others attest to the fact that far from being the preserve of a fringe group, eugenic ideas were mainstream. [27] The medical profession in particular took an early interest in the need to combat "race suicide" in Canada. In a piece read before the American Medico-Psychological Association in 1900, Dr. James Russell of the Hamilton Asylum opined that while there were many processes that aimed to "destroy the moral and intellectual fibre of the race," [28] the elevated status of the Anglo-Saxon race would not be undermined. Speaking in less than subtle metaphors, Dr. Russell painted the picture thus: The immense virility of the Anglo-Saxon race, like that sturdy oak, may resist the encroachments of the canker worm for generations, but unless purge and purified of the disease it will at last crumble and decay. [29] No individual was more prominent in the campaign against "mental defectives" than public health crusader Dr. Helen MacMurchy. Next to successful campaigns on such vital issues as birth control and infant mortality, MacMurchy saw dealing with the problem of the "feeble-minded" as a national priority. With a rather disconcerting mix of compassion and cold-heartedness, MacMurchy in her 1920 book The Almosts: A Study of the Feeble-Minded viewed the problem in this way: It is the age of true democracy that will not only give every one justice, but will redeem the wastes products of humanity and give the mental defective all the chance he needs to develop his gifts and all the protection he needs to keep away from him evils and temptations that he never will be grown up enough to resist, and that society cannot afford to let him fall victim to. [30] Dr. MacMurchy was a fervent advocate of the forcible segregation and sterilization of mental defectives and claimed that society would pay dearly in "expense, crime, immorality, crime and national degeneration" if these "unfortunates" were allowed to reproduce. [31] Mentally defective children become mentally-defective men and women -- mentally defective paupers and criminals ... then the community must be protected from the feeble-minded and the feeble-minded must be protected from many in the community who would lead them into evil ways. [32] [Otherwise] we are wronging them if we go on allowing them to become parents, as we have done in the past in Ontario, wronging their miserable children who should never have been born, and wronging our country and the community by entailing on them that heavy burden of expense, and that heavier burden of crime, vice, misery, and degeneracy which mental defectives always cause. [33] More than a few sources, MacMurchy among them, pay tribute to the early work of the National Council of Women (NCW) in bringing the "menace" of feeble-mindedness to the attention of the Canadian public. Importantly, Angus McLaren in his work Our Own Master Race: Eugenics in Canada 1885-1945 points out that the National Council of Women was the first organized group to take up the campaign for segregation of the feeble-minded. [34] In a National Council of Women pamphlet entitled "Lovest Thou Thy Land?" located in a scrapbook of the Halifax Council of Women the particular urgency posed by the Great War had posed the question in stark terms. Thousands of Canada's best are being slaughtered on European battlefields. Our duty to our country demands conservation of the life at home. The feeble-minded in our midst are therefore a greater menace than ever. We have learned certain facts regarding the problem of the feeble-minded, but we need to know much more ... This European war is a monstrous sort of selection of the unfittest for the ruin of the species. [35] In a similar vein, a Toronto Department of Public Health bulletin released in 1916 warns against the dangers of letting mental defectives breed out of control. Taking a cue from the breeding of plants and animals, Dr. Hastings asks: What safeguards are being used to secure only the reproduction of the fit in the human stock? What precautions are we taking to prevent the reproduction of the mentally defective? Absolutely none. If the farmer who breeds from his most inferior and worthless stock, as well as his best, is classed may we expect to be placed who are making no effort to prevent the reproduction of the feeble-minded, who in addition to being a burden on the State, have an appallingly demoralizing and degenerating influence on the whole race? [36] Again, the carnage of the First World War killing off the "most fit" among us was more than a little cause for concern: Many of the best of our stock are being sacrificed and will be sacrificed. Can we afford, in the nation's interest, to add insult to injury, by permitting the defective class to be constantly reproducing themselves? The only way to reduce the number of the feeble-minded is to make impossible their reproduction, and to make impossible their entry into the country. [37] The Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene (CNCMH) was formed in 1918 by Dr. Clarence Hincks and Dr. Charles K. Clarke and took upon itself the task of advising governments about how to identify and eliminate the problem of feeble-mindedness through testing, segregation and sterilization. Hincks and Clarke promoted themselves as experts on the subject of feeble-mindedness and offered their services accordingly. For decades, the CNCMH functioned as Canada's most effective eugenics lobby group and could count among its listed Halifax members Dr. William H. Hattie, Dr. Eliza Brison, Dr. F.E. Lawlor, Lieutenant-Governor Grant and one-time premier of Nova Scotia, the Hon. Ernest H. Armstrong. [38] The CNCMH bulletin called for governments to take immediate steps for the "care" and "protection" of mental defectives in the better interests of society. The February 1920 issue of the Mental Hygiene Bulletin, also found among the Halifax Council of Women papers, made the then rather uncontroversial statement, "The magnitude of the evil thus left untouched is very great. There is no more potent influence in the production of vice and crime than the unwatched mental defective. [39] In the same bulletin is a 1919 report by the Hon. Justice Frank E. Hodgins who chaired the Royal Commission on the Care and Control of the Feeble-minded in Ontario. The importance of "prevention" was the highlight of his presentation: If the cardinal fact could be assimilated that the elimination of the mental defective from the school and from the street and from the agencies engaged in reforming character would render the efforts of teachers and social workers comparatively easy and empty the jails of over half their inmates, and that these unfortunates can, if taken in time, be made comparatively happy and useful, there would be little time lost in bringing about the desired result. [40] On page fourteen of the bulletin, just below the announcement of a planned CNCMH survey of mental defectives in New Brunswick is a revealing Grimm-like story called "Children versus Foxes". Drawing an explicit parallel between human and animal breeding, the story recounts the experience of an out-of-town visitor who happens upon a particularly wise fox farmer: A conversation with the caretaker revealed the fact that he was a keen student of Mental Hygiene, and at his own suggestion took the visitor to a wired enclosure in which there was a mentally deficient fox. When questioned as to whether he intended using this specimen for breeding purposes he held up his hand in protest and said that if he followed such a policy his industry would be ruined. [41] The idea that radical measures were required to stave off racial degeneration was common ground among progressives of that era. When speaking of mental hygiene measures in 1915, Dr. Helen MacMurchy spoke of its tenets being "universally accepted". [42] The mental hygiene movement in Nova Scotia The politics of eugenics (or mental hygiene, as it become known) had equally erstwhile proponents in the province of Nova Scotia. As early as 1890, Alexander P. Reid in a paper read before the Nova Scotia Institute of Natural Science, viewed the danger the feeble-minded posed in alarmist terms: These "ulcerous and diseased outgrowths on society" whose affliction is "sixty to eighty per cent" inherited will pass away with sufficient effort. [43] Speaking of the "tyranny of defective organization," Dr. Reid remarked, "There are many congenital defects, but crime, idiocy and insanity are the most potent for ill in the culture of the race, and will society not interfere to protect its successors when they cannot help themselves?" [44] In an article written in 1913 entitled "Eugenics", Reid speaks in terms eerily reminiscent of the later Nazi campaign against the Jews: [M]ust society continue to be oppressed by this increasing mass of expensive and worthless humanity ... Were these ideas carried out the whole lot of irresponsibles, imbeciles and criminals would be eliminated in two generations, and some States are now on the high road for this termination ... if we cannot reach perfection let us get as near as we can. [45] Loyal to the idea, Reid reiterated that the source of the "problem" must dealt with conclusively: "The disciple of Eugenics is thus given a sound basis upon which to construct practical work and formulate laws which can in time eliminate the undesirable elements of society." [46] Lamenting the fact that the Nova Scotian public remained unfavourable to the recourse of sterilization, Reid settled for segregation: "Let us place all the feeble-minded under such restraint that procreation be prevented." [47] Probably the most active member of the medical community in Nova Scotia to take on the "problem" of the feeble-minded was Dr. W.H. Hattie, Medical Superintendent from 1898 to 1914 and Provincial Health Officer from 1914 to 1922. In an article called "The Prevention of Insanity", Dr. Hattie's analysis mirrors that of others engaged in this battle: "The average imbecile is not of much use as a citizen. He is usually at least in some degree extra-social if not anti-social. But he is capable of procreating his kind." [48] State intervention, according to Hattie, was also necessary to ensure couples were "properly" paired. With respect to the feeble-minded: More than mere suasion is necessary to any measure of success, however, and there is good sense in the efforts which some lawmakers are putting forth to prevent promiscuous marrying and to place some restrictions on the marriage of the unfit. [49] Seven years later in an article of the same title, Hattie developed on his idea of the type of "suasion" necessary. In the event the deemed defective demonstrated any sexual impulse, the state must intervene: When there is evident defect, particularly if any tendency to eroticism is manifest, the safety of the community, as well as of the unfortunate individual, demands segregation in a suitable institution. This costs more than sterilization or the lethal chamber, but does less violence to sentiment. Some authorities, as Archibald R. Douglas, of the Royal Albert Institution, assert that the imbecile is a much more potent agent in producing racial deterioration than the lunatic. I doubt if we have any more pressing need in Canada today than the proper provision for the feeble-minded members of our country, particularly those who are still sexually competent. [50] In an article entitled "The Physician's Part in Preventing Mental Disorder", Dr. Hattie repeated the mantra of the mental hygiene movement: The so-called lesser grades of mental defect are perhaps really those of paramount importance, for these are accountable for a very large share of the criminality and immortality and delinquency and pauperism which cost us so dearly, and it is these lesser defects which are most likely to be passed on from generation to generation. The problem then is many-sided, and bears so intimately upon national efficiency and national progress that we cannot afford to disregard it. [51] Echoing the apocalyptic tone of his contemporaries across the continent, Hattie warns of a national emergency; only the fittest will survive on the national and international stage: Canada is faced today with a situation not less perilous that that involved in accepting the challenge of the Hun. We have entered upon a period of competition such as never before dreamed of. Our place among the nations depends upon our ability to meet this competition, and this in turn depends upon the physical, mental and moral qualities of our people. [52] Hattie's eugenics was also heavily laced with a virulent social Darwinism: The struggle for existence can best be endured by those who are fittest, while those of limited endowment may be practically compelled to resort to questionable means of acquiring the necessities of life ... This will go far not only towards assuring our people the comfortable enjoyment of life and preparing them for success in the competition with other peoples. [53] The consequences of not taking these "unfortunates" "in hand" are equally dire. With the usual combination of care and callousness so typical of the movement, Dr. Hattie adds, "It is a mercy to protect him [the mental defective] from the world; it is a folly not to protect the world from him." [54] I. A movement is born - The Halifax Local Council of Women In one of the very few references to Nova Scotia, McLaren in his work points out that Canada's first eugenical movement was formed in 1908 in Nova Scotia in the form of the League for the Protection of the Feeble-Minded. [55] True as this may be, organized agitation in support of eugenic measures in Nova Scotia was taken on by the Halifax Council of Women (HCW) at least a full decade earlier. And given the boundless energy and influence of such women as Mrs. J.C. Mackintosh, Mrs. Charles Archibald, and later, Mrs. Agnes Dennis, the dubious honour rightly goes to the HCW. Dr. Prince's speech on the opening of the Brookside Training School gives us a thumbnail sketch of the birth of a movement. As early as 1895, he credits the HCW, "the honour, in an organized way, [of] calling attention to the appalling conditions related to mental deficiency in the province and in advocating governmental rather than private institutions in coping with the problem." [56] Dr. MacMurchy also related that in 1897, at an annual meeting of the National Council of Women held in Halifax, a Dr. Rosebrugh addressed a letter on the subject of the problem of the feeble-minded. [57] And possibly as early as 1906 Mrs. Agnes Dennis and HCW had begun to organize their own survey of the province, sending a circular to doctors, clergyman, overseers of the houses, refuges, etc., in the province of Nova Scotia with a view to finding out the names, ages and conditions of such persons." [58] And according to Prince, as many as a thousand questionnaires were sent out, the expense of printing and mailing absorbed by the provincial government. [59] Apart from the vital issues of extending the franchise to women and whether or not women should serve on school boards, the problem of eliminating the scourge feeble-mindedness was priority number one for the HCW. A series of letters and regular columns in local newspapers do much to shed light on the sense of urgency felt by Council members. The problems of crime, immorality, vice, pauperism, illegitimacy, drunkenness, and venereal disease were all linked to a phenomenon that many felt was breeding out of control. There was absolutely no question that mental defectives represented, as Jane Wisdom reported in The Echo, "the root of all social evil". [60] Criminality was rooted in the genetic makeup of the mental defective who roamed loose, waiting to strike. On Saturday, March 7, 1908, Miss Wallace of the HCW wrote to The Mail: In a word, they compose a class difficult to define, but not difficult to recognize ... Probably the reason they belong to the criminal class is that they are feeble-minded. What can be done for them? ... Now is the time to take hold of these mentally defective children, and make something of them, that they may not become degenerate unemployed criminalsóand perhaps, alas, the parents of children still more mentally defective, degraded and dangerous to the community at large. [61] Mrs. Sexton of the International Order of Daughters of the Empire (I.O.D.E.) confidently made the following comparison: Statistics carefully gathered in the United States and the foremost countries of Europe show the fact that for every fifty normal inhabitants of a country, there is one feeble-minded person. This is, of course, an approximation, but roughly, it would indicate that here in Nova Scotia there are nearly one thousand mentally defective or feeble-minded persons ... They are walking our streets, a constant menace to our community safety. [62] Mrs. Stead and the Press Committee of the HCW add their voices to the virtual certainty of the hereditary transmission of mental defect: We are now burdened with an ever increasing burden of providing for incompetents; for these are almost certainly hereditary, and the progeny of the feeble-minded woman is often cursed with the awful legacy of vice on the one side, mental and moral defects on the other. [63] Then it must be remembered that feeble-mindedness is hereditary in more or less of its symptoms. For instance, feeble-mindedness begets drunkenness and immorality and alcoholism in their turn beget feeble-mindedness in a continuous vicious cycle. [64] The inverted logic of eugenics is seen in a letter written by "An Old Print" to The Mail: The question today is not so much "what shall we do for the feeble-minded prostitutes," but should be "What shall we do about the cause that produced prostitutes." ... If you set out to clarify a filthy steam, you first find the source that made it filthy, and remove the cause. [65] Part of the eugenic narrative is the belief that feeble-minded mothers are afflicted with an "unusual fecundity" [66] and are therefore responsible for the large number of "illegitimate", feeble-minded children born into society. "G.T." of the HCW recounted the popular story of "The Jukes" in her letter to The Recorder: Dr. McCulloch, in his book, "The Tribe of Ishmael," studies the descendents of one diseased man, John Ishmael, and, in a period of forty-eight years, traces five thousand degenerates who have committed almost every known crime. Richard Douglas compiled the history of another family, "The Jukes," the descendents of five degenerate sisters, in which he traced the careers of twelve hundred persons, one repeated tale of disease, insanity, idiocy, and crime. What enormous expense these two families alone have been to their country!" [67] Mrs. Agnes Dennis of the HCW related a local example of this worrisome phenomenon: Some years ago the Women's Council asked the Superintendent of the Halifax Poor House for the number of children born of feeble-minded mothers in that institution in five years. The answer was twenty. These twenty children were the offspring of nine feeble-minded mothers. One had born one child, five had born two and three had born three each. This deplorable report can probably be duplicated by the superintendents of most of our provincial poor houses or poor farms. [68] The minutes taken at the 1920 annual meeting of the HCW are also of interest. The urgency of this vital mission is difficult to overlook: There is nothing vague about it. Modern science has it well in hand. Feeble-mindedness is a failure to develop. It is a danger to the community. He [Dr. Fraser-Harris] instanced their mania for fire, carelessness with fire and weapons, tendency to crimes in sex and prostitution. They are often physically degenerate, often become criminals. The juvenal courts often have to deal with them ... Eugenics aim to have parental conditions right; to be well born is not a matter of heraldry, but of physiology." [69] II. The Nova Scotia League for the Protection of the Feeble-Minded The group with the well-meaning name was formed on June 3, 1908, no doubt at the inspired instigation of the HCW. [70] The League for the Protection of the Feeble-Minded, with the Lieutenant-Governor of the province, J.C. Tory, as its honourary president brought together people from many walks of life to carry out this vital social task. Dr. William H. Hattie, Ernest H. Blois, Sir Frederick Fraser, Judge Wallace, Archbishop McCarthy, Agnes Dennis, Eliza Ritchie, Mrs. F.H. Sexton of the I.O.D.E., and Dr. Frank Woodbury. Later, as the Nova Scotia Society for Mental Hygiene, it would involve such personalities as A.H. MacKay, Superintendent of Education, and Dr. Samuel H. Prince, founder of the Maritime School of Social Work, Kings College professor and prominent social reformer. From very early on in its life the League had easy access to power in the province. The League's minutes for March 9, 1909, demonstrate the willingness shown by then Premier George Murray to accommodate the ambitious plans of the League: Dr. Fraser [later, Sir Frederick Fraser -- S.E.] then urged on the government the necessity of starting immediately to deal with the matter in a practical way. Especially the part of the work which concerns feeble-minded children ... The premier showed great willingness to do anything in his power to help this work of the league. The government promptly agreed to have printed and circulated free of charge all literature prepared for the purpose of the league; to use existing government officials throughout the province to collect definite information concerning all feeble-minded persons in the province and to appoint A.S. Barnstead, Dr. A.H. MacKay and Dr. W.H. Hattie to act with and assist the committee in the campaign of education which is about to be started and in the collection of information and formulation of a definite plan for the protection of the feeble-minded to be submitted to the government on a later date. The premier suggested that something might possibly be done very soon as a piece of land near Dartmouth recently acquired by the government ... It was decided to make an attempt to secure the support and cooperation of influential religious and secular bodies. [71] For years, activists has focused on the need for an institution as the most effective way to segregate, or as the League put it, "care" and "protect" the feeble-minded. The entry for November 9, 1909, read as follows: The committee [Dr. Fraser, Mrs. Agnes Dennis, Dr. Eliza Ritchie, Dr. E MacKay and the secretary] agreed that for the present the institute must be either a provincial government or a private corporation receiving government support in some form ... It was moved and seconded that a committee be appointed to interview the government for the purpose of having an investigation of the number, conditions, needs and causation of the feeble-minded of the province. [72] The modus operandi of the League was agitation. Public meetings, recruitment and pressure on public officials were the ways it could count its success. By 1912 the League could boast fifty branches throughout the province. [73] A.H. MacKay, E.H. Blois and W.H. Hattie were the League's devoted leadership and, not surprisingly, they were the chairmen of the provincial government's "Report Respecting Feeble-Minded In Nova Scotia" in 1916. III. The Murray and Rhodes governments respond On two separate occasions, in 1916 and again in 1926, the Nova Scotia Legislature saw fit to organize royal commissions to investigate the nature of the social danger facing Nova Scotians. Interestingly, both inquiries found that the social, moral and economic welfare of the province was "gravely menaced" and that immediate steps had to be taken to "limit the multiplication of this unfortunate class". Moreover, both commissions concluded that sterilization as a method of selective breeding, though effective, offended popular sentiment. [74] Instead, the more "cost effective" method of segregation was preferred; "defective" boys would be required to learn a trade so as to become a productive member of society and "defective" girls would be kept in care until the child-bearing years have passed. [75] Both inquires drew the same conclusions about the societal impact on the "unwatched" mental defect: We may reasonably assume that this condition is responsible for a very considerable share of the pauperism, illegitimacy, vice, and crime which exist in our province, and we are aware that the defect is one which is singularly prone to be transmitted from parent to child. It would, therefore, seem reasonable that from the economic, as well as from the moral and sociological points of view, a strong effort should be made to limit the multiplication of this unfortunate class. [76] The survey staff found that mental defectives in the province were contributing, out of all proportion to their numbers, to such social problems as dependency, pauperism, spread of disease, delinquency, immorality, illegitimacy and prostitution [77] ... The present cost of mental deficiency to the province exceeds three hundred and fifty thousand dollars per annum." [78] It is obvious that unless methods are developed in Nova Scotia to prevent the feeble-minded from having children, the mentally deficient will increase by leaps and bounds. [79] The 1926 report appears to be the more reliable of the two in terms of methodology. It had called many witnesses from the Nova Scotian community and hired an outside organization to carry out a survey of mental defectives in the province. The 1916 report, on the other hand, looks to be a record of the personal opinions of its chairmen, namely E. H. Blois, A. H. MacKay and W.H. Hattie. But the differences between these two efforts are more apparent than real. While both seem to follow radically different methodologies, it is remarkable that both arrive at the same conclusions and make identical recommendations. It is difficult to account for the fact that two different approaches, one insular and polemical, the other broad and inclusive, arrive at identical positions. Unless, of course, one takes a glance at the quality of the evidence brought before each. The 1916 inquiry quite literally had no evidence to support its wide-reaching conclusions and recommendations. Whenever the chairmen introduced evidence to support its premises, they were largely from dubious American sources, relying unabashedly on an empirical "double inference". One was first asked to believe that American evidence supported the premise that the "unfit" threatened the fabric of American society. Then, one is asked to infer yet again, that since this phenomenon existed in the U.S., then it must also exist in Nova Scotia. The appalling paucity of evidence, however, did not seem to deter its zealous chairmen from recommending some rather far-reaching societal changes. By contrast, the 1926 inquiry had undertaken a consultative and empirical process that had cloaked it in an unquestionable legitimacy. Numerous "persons of undoubted integrity" had presented briefs before the committee. What is more, a province-wide survey of "mental defectives" was carried out by a very reputable medical organization. To the casual observer, the process was open, consultative and scientific. By 1926, however, it would not be overly cynical to suggest the fix was in. Mental hygiene advocates had, by this point, over three decades of effective agitation and organization in support of the cause. The various church, civic and professional groups who gave evidence before the committee could all be counted on to make the same presentation; each had been effectively lobbied by first, the HCW, then later the League. This fact, coupled with the apparent successes of eugenic measures in other parts of the country, ensured that one position and one position only would be heard before the committee. Dr. Smith Walker, representing the Nova Scotia Medical Society, "gave figures to show the extent of feeble-mindedness among criminals and degenerates and showed how the public was paying enormous sums for the maintenance of these classes." [80] Dr. W.H. Hattie, also of the Medical Society and Dalhousie Medical College referred favourably to a student's M.A. thesis whose opinion was that "care" should be provided, "first of all for females of child-bearing age, and especially for those who might be benefited by such training." [81] Rev. Father MacDonald, professor at Saint Francis Xavier University and special representative of His Lordship the Bishop of Antigonish, "expressed the sympathy of the Antigonish diocese with the work of the commission. Thought that improvements in the country schools would help in some measure. Some of the feeble-minded should undoubtedly be segregated and prevented from propagating their kind." [82] Miss Catherine Graham of the Graduate Nurses Association of Nova Scotia, "referred to a family containing six childrenóhad been numerous miscarriagesóconditions of this house indescribableóoldest girl of thirteen associating with disreputable colored people. Considered that it was a blot on the community that nothing had been done for the feeble-minded." [83] Mrs. Agnes Dennis, representing the National Council of Women and the Victorian Order of Nurses commented that, "in making an investigation at the City Home at Halifax it was found that there had been twenty children born of nine feeble-minded mothers ... the Victorian Order of Nurses were continually called upon to go into homes where there are feeble-minded persons and that the nurses find that the spread of communicable diseases in these families cannot be readily prevented. They not only spread disease in the family but outside because they will not follow instructions." [84] Mrs. Marion S. Morrow of the I.O.D.E. revealed she, "visited many parts of the Nova Scotia where there are terrible cases of feeble-mindedness. Knew of one feeble-minded woman who had eighteen illegitimate children, all of whom were feeble-minded." [85] To be sure, the survey conducted by Clarence Hincks of the CNCMH at the invitation of the provincial government was the evidential backbone of the 1926 Royal Commission. [86] The province's schools, institutions and homes for mental defectives were studied to provide a more precise account of the incidence of feeble-mindedness in Nova Scotia. [87] Hincks' findings had confirmed the following: "The survey of the province revealed that although the percentage of feeble-minded among adults was roughly one-sixth of one percent, that of the children revealed an alarming rate of three per cent." [88] He also discovered: Three families that can compare with the notorious Kallikak family described by Dr. H.H. Goddard, were found in Nova Scotia. One of the three has been studied carefully and the following facts are interesting: A man married a feeble-minded girl in 1783 and 570 descendents have been traced. Members of the family living at the present time in one section of the province include 25 feeble-minded, 41 cases of illegitimacy, 9 who have received penitentiary sentences, 7 who have been sent to jail and 3 to reformatories; ten families have received public relief over considerable periods of time and many others are living in dilapidated hovels." [89] Canada's most influential eugenics lobby had spoken; unless Nova Scotia undertook effective mental hygiene measures, the feeble-minded would continue to reproduce their kind at "an alarming rate". [90] Hincks was the logical choice for such an undertaking having done similar surveys in several other provinces. But Hincks was in no way a disinterested party in the process. Canada's foremost proponent of sterilization and segregation of the "unfit" could be counted on to confirm the existence of the menace under the guise of scientific objectivity. The question had never been one of the "possible" existence of the feeble-minded among us, but rather the extent of their "ever-increasing" numbers. IV. Legislation In 1927, the Rhodes government moved quickly to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission, and, by so doing, became one of Canada's few governments to give eugenic doctrine a legislative form. Bills 64, 70 and 84 were all enacted to amend the Children's Protection [91], Poor Relief [92] and Education Acts [93], respectively. Also, Bill 174 was enacted to establish the only "training school" east of Orillia, Ontario. The Nova Scotia Training School finally opened in November, 1929 and was modelled on the infamous Wrentham and Fernald State Schools in Massachusetts. [94] Dr. Prince, in his oration at the founding of the school, made the following point: The maximum admission to any training school, it is now believed, will never be more than one in every thousand population. So that this Brookside campus planned for an eventual village of six hundred children, should meet the needs of the province of Nova Scotia for a long time to come. [95] It must have been quite sobering to realize that zero-point-one per cent of the population had the potential to "sap the roots of civilization itself", but as Dr. Prince reminded his listeners: [It] must never be forgotten that this undertaking is as much in the interests of society as it is for the protection and welfare of the unfortunates themselves. If it costs something to have an institution such as this, it costs infinitely more not to have it, for so great are the social dangers of mental defect, so interwoven is it with disease, dependency, delinquency, and other social ills, that to continue to neglect it in this province is not only an economic error, but it is to reap a crop of thorns and thistles which will be a blight upon the province for all time. [96] Section eight of the Nova Scotia Training School Act [97] gave the board unlimited power to commit any child who fit the "criteria" of a mental defective, permitting it to "keep and detain or cause to be kept or detained, for the purposes herein, any defective child committed to such training school under the provisions of any Act or Statute of the Province." The definition of "defective child" in section two of the Act refers the reader to another new piece of legislation. The Children's Protection Act was amended in 1927 to include a new section, Part VI, which outlined a detailed criteria of the different categories of mental defect known to social engineers. Dividing "mentally defective" children into "idiots", "imbeciles" and "morons", the legislation lifted word for word the language and categories of England's notorious Mental Deficiency Act of 1913, and inserted it into provincial legislation. It is at this very moment that eugenic categories were enshrined in Nova Scotian law. Remarkably, these categories remained law until 1961 when three words were severed and replaced with "severely", "moderately" and "mildly" retarded. Only in 1976 when the Children's Services Act came into being was the entire section done away with entirely. Conclusion It is not difficult to imagine the pride that comes with having finally achieved what one has dreamed of for decades. Speaking at an annual meeting of the Nova Scotia Society for Mental Hygiene the day before the cornerstone was laid, Dr. Prince was glowing in his appraisal: We are turning a new page in our book of golden days. There is a spell upon us and about us, which is more than the spell of autumn. It is like the night before Christmas. It is like the denouement of a beautiful story. For at last all is in readiness for the silver trowel, when a few hours hence there shall be well and truly laid the corner stone of the new Brookside school, which to bring into being this society was born. [98] As the history of eugenic social policy has demonstrated, one person's beautiful story is always someone else's nightmare. Hundreds of "worse than worthless" children were herded into this institution to save the rest of society from ruin. Not one of their names is known. Compounding the problem is the fact that this disturbing chapter of our history has all but disappeared from the history books, if it was ever there in the first place. Where there is oppression, there are always victims. The scapegoats in this eugenic crusade were the children. In fact, it is likely that thousands of children passed through the doors of the Brookside Training School, branded with the stigma of mental defect and treated as the "waste products" they were perceived to be. One thing is certain: Nova Scotia must atone for the violence committed against these helpless children. Disturbing still is the fact that by the time Alberta, British Columbia and Nova Scotia had drawn up legislation to eradicate mental defectives from society, eugenics as a scientific doctrine had largely been discredited. [99] By 1926, one of the main architects of the Nova Scotian eugenics movement, Ernest H. Blois, in a paper read before the Annual Conference of Children's Aid Societies drops the following bombshell: [W]e were told once that most crimes, sexual immorality, especially among females, and evil in many forms were due largely to feeble-mindedness. This we now know to be untrue, but nevertheless, in dealing with these particular forms of vice and crime, feeble-mindedness is one, and in some cases a very large factor in a very complex problem. [100] Yet, he still argued for their incarceration. One of the conclusions from the 1926 Royal Commission included the incredible statement, "too little is known regarding the hereditary nature of feeble-mindedness". [101] They, too, argued for confinement. How the eugenic argument survived without its main theoretical support remains a mystery. A look at the historical facts from across the continent shows that eugenics left no territory untouched. It was perhaps a movement that seemed impeccable in its logic and unstoppable in momentum. After all was said and done, the victims paid the price and the "progressives" went on with their lives as if nothing had happened. [102] Appendix 1 Confidential notes for social workers and welfare agencies in connection with the survey of mental deficiency in Nova Scotia. The survey staff would appreciate the names, ages and addresses of mentally deficient individuals who fall into the classes 1 to 8 outlined in the next paragraph. In connection with the names presented notes should be appended giving evidence of mental deficiency together with showing in what way the case is a social problem. The following eight types of mental deficiencies are of interest to the survey staff. 1) Feeble-minded children of school age who can be trained with profit in special classes in the public school system. These children have IQ's of between 50 and 75; they have no ingrained anti-social traits and they come from reasonably good homes. 2) Feeble-minded children of the moron type (IQ between 50 and 75) who have pronounced anti-social traits or grave personality defects and who, though trainable, are unsuited to special class instruction in public schools. 3) Children of the moron type who, because of unsatisfactory home conditions are unsuited for special class instruction in public schools. 4) Middle and high grade imbecile children (IQ 25-50) who are trainable in an institution but unsuited for instruction in special classes in public schools. 5) Idiot and low grade imbecile children (IQ less than 25) who are more or less helpless but who can be trained to a degree in habits of cleanliness and self-help in an institution. 6) Mentally deficient girls of high grade imbecile or moron type -- girls of child-bearing age who have immoral sexual tendencies and who require institutional training. 7) Mentally deficient adults both male and female who are dependant on society for support. 8) Mentally deficient adults both male and female who come to the notice of the state because of delinquent acts. (Appendix 1 cont'd) NOTE: - The record card contains spaces for such information as - name, age, date, address, referred by, data suggesting mental deficiency and data concerning the case as a social problem. The way in which the card can be used is illustrated by the following notes on a hypothetical case: - Name; Miss Jennie Smith Age; 22 Date; Nov. 1st, 1926 Address; 10 Park St, referred by; Miss A. Jones, Halifax C.A.S. Halifax. Date suggesting mental deficiency; Jennie Smith was a failure at school. She did not get further than the third grade. As a child she was considered dull and stupid. Those who know her now realize that she is lacking in judgement and easily imposed upon. In talking she has a silly inconsequential grin. Data concerning the case as a Social Problem; - This girl gets temporary employment as a house maid. She never holds a position for any length of time. She has given birth to one illegitimate child and it is feared that she is again consorting with men. Bibliography Monographs, papers and journals Blois, Ernest H. The Mentally Deficient as a Social Problem (C.A.S: 1926), N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14757. Callinicos, Alex. Social Theory: An Historical Introduction (NYU Press: New York, 1999) Canadian Mental Health Association. Milestones in Mental Health, 1962, N.S.A.R.M., v/f v.301 #6 Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene. "Mental Hygiene Survey of the Province of Nova Scotia", Canadian Journal of Mental Hygiene, v.3, no.1, April, 1921, N.S.A.R.M., v/f v.372 #25. Hatfield, Lorne. Sammy the Prince (Lancelot Press: Halifax, 1990) Hattie, W.H. "The Prevention of Insanity", Maritime Medical News, v.16, Feb 04, no.2, pp.44-47. ---------------. National Health, the Nation's Greatest Asset (Department of Public Works: Halifax, 1909) ---------------. "The Prevention of Insanity", Canadian Medical Association Journal, v.1 no.11, November, 1911, pp. 1118 -- 1024. ---------------. "The Physician's Part in Preventing Mental Disorder", Public Health Journal, v. 11, 1920, pp. 315-320. ---------------. "The Coordination of State and Private Enterprises in Public Health Work", Public Health Journal, v. 11, 1920, pp. 418 -- 421. ---------------. "Sanitation", Public Health Journal, v. 11, 1920, pp. 207 -- 21. ---------------. "What Does Public Health Administration Embrace?", Canadian Medical Association Journal, v.11, 1920, pp. 900-903. ---------------. "Mental Hygiene -- part 1", Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin, v.9, no.2, February, 1930, pp.75-79. Hincks, Clarence M. "Recent Progress of the Mental Health Movement in Canada", Canadian Medical Association Journal, v.11, Jan. 1921, pp. 822-825. MacKinnon, Fred R. The Life and Times of Ernest Blois (Senior Citizen's Secretariat: Halifax, 1992) MacMurchy, Helen. The Almosts: A Study of the Feeble-Minded (Riverside Press: Boston, 1920) -----------------------. Organization and Management of Auxiliary Classes (J.K.Cameron: Ontario, 1915) McLaren, Angus. Our Own Master Race: Eugenics in Canada, 1885-1945 (McClelland & Stewart: Toronto, 1990) Merrill, Maude. "Feeble-Mindedness and Crime: The Descendents of Jasper Bar" Dalhousie Review, v.1, no.4, Jan. 22, p.360 - 365. Prince, Samuel H. "Mental Hygiene -- part 2", Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin, v.9, no.2, February, 1930, pp. 126-131. Prince, Samuel. The Social System: a Compendium of Popular Sociology (Ryerson Press: Toronto, 1958) Pringle, Heather. "Alberta Barren" Saturday Night, June, 1997. Vol.112, no.5; pp. 30-40. Reid, Alexander P. Stirpiculture and the Ascent of Man (T.C Allen: Halifax, 1890) --------------------. "Eugenics: The Sordid, Scientific Side or Life", Public Health Journal, v.4 (1913) pp.284-286. Russell, James. "Is The Anglo-Saxon Race Degenerating?" Canadian Practitioner and Review, August, 1900. Schiller, F.C.S. "The Case for Eugenics", Dalhousie Review, v.4, No.4 Jan.25 p.405 - 410. Newspapers "Class of Unfortunates Worth Looking After" The Echo, Saturday, February 29, 1908. "Care of the Feeble-minded" The Echo, Saturday, March 7, 1908. "Canada Should Have Uniform Health Laws" The Echo, Friday, October 5, 1917. "The City's Welfare" , The Echo, February 16, 1918. "Care of the Feeble-Minded: A Present Day Problem", The Mail, Saturday, March 7, 1908. "Nova Scotia is Doing Nothing for Feeble-Minded Among Its Population", The Mail, Saturday, March 14, 1908. "Ninety-One Mentally Defective Children Enrolled in Our Schools, Teachers Report" Editorial - The Mail, Saturday April 1, 1911. "The Care and Training of the Feeble-Minded in This Community", The Mail, Friday, November 17, 1911. "Why Not Do Something for the Feeble-Minded?" The Mail, December 5, 1917. "The Feeble-Minded", The Recorder, March 9, 1908. Other Department of Public Health Bulletin, "Is the Mentally Defective a Problem in Preventive Medicine?" - (monthly) Toronto, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14723. Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene Mental Hygiene Bulletin, February 20, #1, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14723. First Annual Report of the Nova Scotia Training School (Province of Nova Scotia: 1929) Halifax Local Council of Women -- minutes, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 9596 National Council of Women of Canada, "Lovest Thou Thy Land?" brief prepared in support of a Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency in Canada -- N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14723. National Council of Women of Canada, "Mental Hygiene in Nova Scotia", December 21, 1929, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 9596. Nova Scotia Society for Mental Hygiene, - minutes - N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14757. Report Respecting Feeble-Minded In Nova Scotia, Journals and Proceedings of the House of Assembly, 1917, Part 2 (Commission of Public Works and Mines: Halifax, 1918) Report of the Royal Commission Concerning Mentally Deficient Persons in Nova Scotia, Hon. W.L. Hall, chair (Halifax, 1927) Court Decisions Re Eve, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 388. Muir v. Alberta (1996), 132 D.L.R. (4th) 695. Legislation The Children's Protection Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c. 166, as am. by S.N.S, c. 43. The Education Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c.60, as am. by S.N.S. 1927, c.2. Nova Scotia Training School Act, S.N.S. 1927, c.5. The Poor Relief Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c.48, as am. by S.N.S. 1927, c.21. Endnotes 1 The Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin, v.9, no.2, February 1930, p.85 2 Hatfield, Lorne. Sammy the Prince (Lancelot Press: Halifax, 1990) p.155 3 "Nova Scotia is Doing Nothing for Feeble-Minded Among Its Population", The Mail, Saturday, March 14, 1908. 4 Red Deer was the site of the provincial training school (PTS) that had sterilized Leilani Muir. See Muir v. Alberta (1996), 132 D.L.R. (4th) 695. 5 Prince, Samuel quoted in First Annual Report of the Nova Scotia Training School (Province of Nova Scotia: 1929) p.28 6 Prince, Samuel H. "Mental Hygiene -- part 2", Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin, v.9, no.2, February, 1930, p. 129 7 Prince, Training School, p.27 8 Report of the Royal Commission Concerning Mentally Deficient Persons in Nova Scotia, Hon. W.L. Hall, chair (Halifax, 1927) p.40 9 Galton Francis. "Hereditary Talent and Character" quoted in Callinicos, Alex. Social Theory: An Historical Introduction (NYU Press: New York, 1999) p. 107 10 Callinicos, Alex. Social Theory: An Historical Introduction (NYU Press: New York, 1999) p. 108 11 McLaren, Angus. Our Own Master Race: Eugenics in Canada, 1885-1945 (M & S: Toronto, 1990) p.24 12 Ibid., p.14 13 Merrill, Maude. "Feeble-Mindedness and Crime: The Descendents of Jasper Bar" Dalhousie Review, v.1, no.4, Jan. 22, p.360 14 Ibid., p.361 15 Reid, Alexander P. "Eugenics: The Sordid, Scientific Side or Life", Public Health Journal, v.4 (1913) pp.284 16 Schiller, F.C.S. "The Case for Eugenics", Dalhousie Review, v.4, No.4 Jan/25 p.409 17 Ibid., p.406 18 McLaren, Our Own, p.169 19 Pringle, Heather. "Alberta Barren", Saturday Night, June, 1997. Vol.112, no.5, p. 40 20 McLaren, Our Own, p.169 21 Ibid., p.170 22 Ibid., p.90 23 Report Respecting Feeble-Minded In Nova Scotia, Journals and Proceedings of the House of Assembly, 1917, Part 2 (Commission of Public Works and Mines: Halifax, 1918) 24 Report of the Royal Commission Concerning Mentally Deficient Persons in Nova Scotia, Hon. W.L. Hall, chair (Halifax, 1927) 25 Ibid., p.41 26 Schiller, "Eugenics", p.410 27 McLaren, Our Own, p.166 28 Russell, James. "Is The Anglo-Saxon Race Degenerating?", Canadian Practitioner and Review, August, 1900, p.12 29 Ibid., p.12 30 MacMurchy, Helen. The Almosts: A Study of the Feeble-Minded (Riverside Press: Boston, 1920) p.173 31 MacMurchy, Helen. Organization and Management of Auxiliary Classes (J.K.Cameron: Ontario, 1915) p.25 32 Ibid., p.2 33 Ibid., p.3 34 McLaren, Our Own, p.37 35 National Council of Women of Canada, "Lovest Thou Thy Land?", brief prepared in support of a Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency in Canada -- N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14723. 36 Department of Public Health Bulletin, "Is the Mentally Defective a Problem in Preventive Medicine?" - (monthly) Toronto, Nova Scotia Archives and Records Management (hereafter N.S.A.R.M.), MG 20, micro. 14723. 37 Ibid. 38 Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene - Mental Hygiene Bulletin, February 20, #1, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14723. 39 Ibid., p.12 40 Ibid., p.11 41 Ibid., p.14 42 McLaren, Our Own, p.27 43 Reid, Alexander P. Stirpiculture and the Ascent of Man (T.C Allen: Halifax, 1890) p.5 44 Ibid., p.6 45 Reid, Alexander P. "Eugenics: The Sordid, Scientific Side or Life", Public Health Journal, v.4 (1913) p. 286 46 Ibid., p.285 47 Ibid., p.286 48 Hattie, W.H. "The Prevention of Insanity", Maritime Medical News, v.16, Feb 04, no.2, p.45 49 Ibid., p.47 50 Hattie, W.H. "The Prevention of Insanity", Canadian Medical Association Journal, v.1 no.11, November, 1911, p. 1022 51 Hattie, W.H. "The Physician's Part in Preventing Mental Disorder", Public Health Journal, v. 11, 1920, pp. 316 52 Ibid., p.319 53 Hattie, W.H. "Sanitation", Public Health Journal, v. 11, 1920, p. 207 54 Hattie, W.H. "Prevention", (1904), p.45 55 McLaren, Our Own, p.24 56 Prince, Training School, p.28 57 MacMurchy, Helen. Auxiliary Classes, p.11 58 "Class of Unfortunates Worth Looking After", The Echo, Saturday, February 29, 1908. 59 Prince, Training School, p.28 60 "Canada Should Have Uniform Health Laws", The Echo, Friday, October 5, 1917. 61 "Care of the Feeble-Minded: A Present Day Problem", The Mail, Saturday, March 7, 1908. 62 "Nova Scotia is Doing Nothing for Feeble-Minded Among Its Population" The Mail, Saturday, March 14, 1908. 63 "Care of the Feeble-minded", The Echo, Saturday, March 7, 1908. 64 "The City's Welfare", The Echo, Feb.16, 1918. 65 "Why Not Do Something for the Feeble-Minded?", The Mail, December 5, 1917. 66 Report Respecting Feeble-Minded In Nova Scotia, p.3 67 "The Feeble-Minded", The Recorder, March 9, 1908 68 "The Care and Training of the Feeble-Minded in This Community", The Mail, Friday, November 17, 1911. 69 Halifax Local Council of Women -- minutes, N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 9596 70 Prince, Training School, p.29 71 Nova Scotia Society for Mental Hygiene - minutes - N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14757 72 Ibid. 73 Halifax Local Council of Women -- minutes, December 18, 1912. See also Nova Scotia Society for Mental Hygiene - minutes, December 2, 1912. 74 Report Respecting Feeble-Minded, p.8; Report of the Royal Commission, p.42 75 Report Respecting Feeble-Minded, p.8; Report of the Royal Commission, p.32 76 Report Respecting Feeble-Minded, p.8 77 Report of the Royal Commission, p.37 78 Ibid., p.38 79 Ibid., p.32 80 Ibid., p.26 81 Ibid., p.25 82 Ibid., p.24 83 Ibid., p.21 84 Ibid., p.20 85 Ibid., p.18 86 History sometimes provides interesting parallels. The Canadian National Committee for Mental Hygiene was the forerunner to today's Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) and the League is the parent of the Nova Scotia Division of the CMHA. The CMHA website makes no mention of its long eugenic pedigree. 87 See appendix 1 for the criteria devised for identifying the feeble-minded - N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14757. 88 Hincks accounted for the unusually high rate of feeble-mindedness among children by highlighting the fact that Nova Scotia had experienced an abnormal rate of emigration of its better stock to the U.S. Report of the Royal Commission, p.36 89 Report of the Royal Commission, p.32 90 Ibid. 91 The Children's Protection Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c. 166, as am. by S.N.S, c. 43. 92 The Poor Relief Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c.48, as am. by S.N.S. 1927, c.21. 93 The Education Act, R.S.N.S. 1923, c.60, as am. by S.N.S. 1927, c.2. 94 Prince, Training School, p.23 95 Prince, Training School, p.26 96 Ibid. 97 Nova Scotia Training School Act, S.N.S. 1927, c.5. 98 Prince quoted in the Nova Scotia Medical Bulletin, v.9, February 1930, p.146 99 Pringle, Heather. "Alberta Barren", Saturday Night, June, 1997. Vol.112, no.5; pp. 30-40. 100 Blois, Ernest H. The Mentally Deficient as a Social Problem (C.A.S: 1926), N.S.A.R.M., MG 20, micro. 14757 101 Report of the Royal Commission, p.42 102 The only participant to have shown anything resembling remorse for the past is Mr. Blois. During an address to children's aid conference delegates in June 1946, Blois assessed the lessons of the past: As workers let us rid ourselves of false claims to knowledge which we do not possess. Let us be less conceited and more humble in the presence of truth. We have been too eager to follow new and strange gods -- to mistake the slogan for the battle ... One thing we definitely need at this time and that is more exact knowledge. There is far too much taken for truth because someone, often of little importance and less knowledge, said it was true. We require scientific study of many matters about which we know very little but what we are told by someone who arrived at that particular conclusion without careful and scientific study of sufficient facts to warrant a worthwhile opinion, much less the laying down of a basic rule. See MacKinnon, Fred R. The Life and Times of Ernest Blois (Senior Citizen's Secretariat: Halifax, 1992)

Comments to : shunpike@shunpiking.com Copyright New Media Services Inc. © 2005. The views expressed herein are the writers' own and do not necessarily reflect those of shunpiking magazine or New Media Publications. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content. Copyright of written and photographic and art work remains with the creators.