Assimilation, Removal, Discipline, and Confinement

A full understanding of the roots of child separation must begin with Native children. This Article demonstrates how modern child welfare, delinquency, and education systems are rooted in the social control of indigenous children. It examines the experiences of Native girls in federal and state systems from the late 1800s to the mid1900s to show that, despite their ostensibly benevolent and separate purposes, these institutions were indistinguishable and interchangeable. They were simply differently styled mechanisms of forced assimilation, removal, discipline, and confinement. As the repeating nature of government intervention into the lives of Native children makes clear, renaming a system does not change its effect. The historical roots of these systems must be acknowledged, and the current systems must be abolished and replaced. To answer the question of what a nonpunitive, non-assimilative system would look like, this Article looks to tribal courts and indigenous justice systems. It points to specific examples of how Native communities have reshaped ideas about caring for and disciplining children, including traditional adoption, kinship care, wellness courts, family group conferencing, and a “best interests” standard that emphasizes the link between individual and collective well-being.

Family Conferencing: Responsibility at Grassroots Level – A Comparative Analysis between the Netherlands and South Africa

As family group conferencing is gaining world-wide recognition as an alternative dispute resolution process, this article aims to outline the origin and relevance of this process, which promotes solution-finding to family problems by the family themselves and/or the social network and usually results in a plan or agreement that will be implemented collaboratively by the people involved. Although it was originally used in child protection matters, the process is now used for a wide range of problems pertaining to families and individual family members, including divorce matters, the illness or death of a family member, the care of the elderly, family financial problems, bullying, addiction cases, domestic violence and child justice matters. The process is also suitable for application in problems concerning any group, neighbourhood or school. Next, the application of family group conferencing in both the Netherlands and South Africa is first examined and then briefly compared. It appears that family group conferencing through Eigen Kracht in the Netherlands is an established practice which consists of a relatively simple and quick process and yields positive results for families/communities experiencing problems. Recently the Dutch Youth Act of 2015 (Jeugdwet) made legislative provision inter alia for a family group plan to be drafted by parents, in conjunction with next-of-kin or others who are part of the social environment of a youth/juvenile person. On the other hand, although extensive legislative provision is made for family group conferencing by the Children's Act 38 of 2005 in children's court proceedings and by the Child Justice Act 75 of 2008 in the child justice system in South Africa, the process has not yet reached its potential in terms of the implementation of the concept. Lastly, some recommendations are made which mainly aim to contribute to the implementation of the concept in South Africa, in that the model will eventually be fully developed and utilised for the benefit of individuals, children, their families and/or social network.

The value of recognition theory to Family Group Conferencing and child-care and protection

Much has been written over the past thirty years within the international social work literature on Family Group Conferencing as a process of decision making. Yet, the theories that frame our understanding of how Family Group Conferencing contributes towards family outcomes are less distinct. This article makes an original contribution to this literature by proposing the use of recognition theory as a beneficial lens for understanding the Family Group Conferencing process. The recognition theory contends that social relations acknowledge and validate personal existence and are pivotal to identify formation; a just society is therefore one where everyone gets due recognition. A retrospective qualitative study will be used to exemplify how Family Group Conferencing can create the conditions within which participants can experience different forms of recognition: care; respect; solidarity and, as such, experience a level of social justice (or not). It is argued that recognition within the Family Group Conferencing process can influence the identity and relationships of those involved in social work services. This article has significance beyond those with an interest in Family Group Conferencing as the recognition theory can shed light on the nature of relationships in social work practice more generally.

Islands of Safety: Restoring Dignity in Violence-Prevention Work with Indigenous Families

Islands of Safety is a model and process designed in conjunction with Métis Community Services in Victoria, B.C. Based on a focus of human dignity and resistance, safety knowledges of women and Indigenous peoples, Islands of Safety was created by Métis family therapist Cathy Richardson and developer of response-based therapy Allan Wade. The initial stages of project design, pilot project implementation were funded by the Law Foundation of B.C. Resembling family group conferencing on the surface but rooted in different philosophical terrain, the Islands of Safety process is based on the understanding that people resist violence and prefer respect.

Apology and Restitution in a Role-play Restorative Justice Experiment: Multiple Perspectives, Multiple Measures

Restorative justice provides an alternative to retributive justice by seeking to restore criminal offenders to be responsible members of the community. Often offenders will apologize (A) and offer to make restitution (R) for the damage done. Such offers might affect all parties present by promoting forgiveness (though that is not a stated goal of restorative justice), resolution of damages, and positive attitudes toward justice. We investigated Family Group Conferencing (FGC), which involves offender, victim, and supporters of each, in a mediated 30-minute dialogue. Namely, we organized role-play simulation meetings between “victims,” “offenders,” and the “mother” of each. There were 64 participants (16 groups of 4 participants). Each group role-played a mediated FGC that was video recorded. The offender had either to apologize and offer restitution (AR) or avoid both (No AR). Questionnaires assessed forgiveness (and other outcomes) from each of the four participants’ perspectives. Coders coded behavior during the role-play. AR promoted forgiveness by all parties, but to different degrees. Coded “softness” of offender’s behavior (i.e., nonverbal signs of remorse, contrition, and regret) affected victim’s behaviors and ratings by women role-playing both mothers. The role-play simulation allowed some understanding of the inner working of FGCs relative to retrospective questionnaires.