• Research Areas
• Publications
• New Releases
• Research Reports
• by Subject
• by Title
• Advanced Search
• JustResearch
• Fact Sheets
• Site Map
• Contact Us

2. 2.0 Nunavut
4. 2.4 Review of Programs in Other (Non-Nunavut) Remote Aboriginal Communities
5. 2.4.5 Factors Contributing to Successful Programming
5. 2.5 Recommendations for Victim Services in Nunavut
1. 2.5.1 Introduction

Previous Page | Table of Content | Next Page

2.4.5 Factors Contributing to Successful Programming

The programs described throughout this section all work in close cooperation with available women’s shelters, social workers, probation and parole officers, addictions programs and other service providers. They also liaise with officers of the court, police, court workers, First Nations, Métis and Inuit organizations, Friendship Centres, interagency committees and community justice committees.

All the various programs contacted are located in remote, isolated, First Nation, Métis and Inuit communities. In this regard, many find themselves faced with the same challenges as victim service providers in Nunavut. Respondents and contributors to this research describe the challenges they face in service delivery in more detail in the previous section. However, a summary of their concerns is useful here while considering factors that contribute to successful programming. A summary of these challenges includes:

• high levels of spousal assault, sexual assault, child abuse, addictions, suicide, family breakdown, residential school trauma, post-traumatic stress syndrome and inter-generational grief, poverty, low education levels, high levels of unemployment, lack of public and affordable housing;
• uncertainty and fear of the police and court system;
• low levels of reporting violent crime;
• fewer services for victims than are available in larger centres (with the attendant problems of trying to transport victims to shelters and other services hundreds of miles away);
• lack of legislation protecting victim rights and safety;
• lack of an overall community plan for dealing with chronic spousal and sexual assault, and in general, denial that these crimes are as prevalent as they are;
• the lack of leadership within all levels of government in the area of interpersonal violence;
• the additional vulnerability of Aboriginal women and children and the emphasis in remote, Aboriginal communities on the well being of the offender over the well-being of the victim;
• a justice system in which the experience of the victim appears to carry less weight than the offender;
• lack of trained community professionals, para-professionals and volunteers to assist with community safety and service provision;
• uncertainty over year-to-year funding for programs, or program components (with the result that too much time is spent writing proposals in a never ending search for resources); and
• feeling sometimes misunderstood and ignored by funders and service providers in larger centres and government offices.

In general, victim service providers in non-Nunavut remote locations, do not feel overwhelmed by these challenges but, rather, take them in stride as a ‘given’ in terms of working conditions. In fact, many of those interviewed feel very positive about recent initiatives to increase the status and services available to victimized people. An analysis of “best practices” in victim services programming, based on these consultations, can be outlined using three basic categories. These categories are: a community development approach; superior short- and long-term victim recovery programs; and progressive legislation.

A Community Development Approach

Victim services programs which take an accessible, non-judgmental community development approach appear to be the most successful when success is measured in terms of overall usage, effectiveness in healing and prevention, and community acceptance and ownership.

This approach, as seen in Rocky Victim Services (Rocky Mountain House, Alberta), the Three Sisters Haven Society (Dease Lake, B.C.) and the Yellowknife Women’s Centre (Yellowknife, NWT), gives the community the opportunity, skills and courage to support victims and reject interpersonal violence as a social norm. These services have certain “best practices” in common. These are:

• services, but particularly staff, are well known and highly accessible to all community members;
• staff understands the history, traditions, beliefs and social norms of the First Nation, Métis or Inuit culture in their location;
• staff understands the short- and long-term impact of colonization, addictions, residential schools, poverty, interpersonal violence and chronic trauma;
• staff understands the local social problems as listed earlier;
• staff stays in constant contact and have personal relationships with other service providers, the Aboriginal leadership, elders and all community members;
• staff visits and meets with community members in their own homes and offices (i.e., they don’t expect community members to come to them);
• combinations of services, all of which are needed by victimized people, are available in one location;
• these services are well connected to all community service providers, meeting and working regularly with police, band councils and other community agencies and programs;
• the service in question requests input from the community into their programming and then works to address the requests in a concrete manner;
• staff understands the safety and recovery needs of victims;
• staff are highly committed to their work and advocate for victims on a personal basis, and are known public advocates for all victimized people; and
• staff are open to innovative programs and work creatively with the limited resources at their disposal.

Several additional programs, described earlier, are notable for encouraging a community development approach to victim services. These are the Happy Valley - Goose Bay Victim Services (Labrador) and the RCMP Victim Assistance Volunteer program (Yukon). These programs train permanent community members in immediate crisis intervention, victim rights and victim court preparation. These volunteers and ‘para-professionals’ are tied to a larger network of victim services within their region that supervises, trains and supports them in their work.

While the community-based programs in Labrador and Yukon do not offer the same range of services as those in Rocky Mountain House, Dease Lake and Yellowknife, they can be considered to take a “best practices” community development approach because they:

• utilize the existing permanent community members in program delivery;
• tie these staff to the policing, victim services and justice services in their community and region;
• help shift community norms from one of blaming victims to one of supporting victims by employing indigenous people; and
• increase the feelings of safety and validity amongst victimized community members.

Superior Short- and Long-Term Victim Recovery Programs

Excellent examples of long-term victim recovery programs can be found in the Isuarsivik Treatment Program in Kuujjuaq, Quebec, and the YWCA Women and Children’s Healing and Recovery Program in Yellowknife, NWT.

The Isuarsivik Treatment Program has developed one of the first successful Inuit addictions treatment programs in Canada. For many victims in the isolated areas of Canada a substantial factor in breaking through the chronic violence in their lives involves coming to grips with their addictions. The “best practices” in this program include:

• use of Inuit language and culture;
• exploration of Inuit spirituality and traditions;
• use of paid Inuit staff;
• incorporation of useful treatment approaches from other cultures; and
• a strong follow-up and aftercare program.

The YWCA Women and Children’s Healing and Recovery Program is another example of excellence in the long-term treatment of chronically victimized women and children. The strength of this program is due to the following factors:

• the program is long enough (10 months) to stabilize participants and inspire permanent progress in terms of attitudes, knowledge, feelings and behaviour;
• it is also long enough to secure stable permanent housing and childcare;
• there is time to resolve long-term legal and financial problems;
• there is time for participants to develop a full informal and formal support network within the community; and
• participants’ needs in every area are addressed: physical health and safety, financial support, personal skill development, parenting support, educational opportunity, employment training and job search, cognitive and emotional therapeutic intervention, and addictions treatment.

In addition, the recent restorative justice initiatives in some jurisdictions, while not usually categorized as “victim recovery programs”, have the potential to greatly assist in the recovery of victimized people in the short term. The example used in this paper is the Buffalo Regional Victim Services in Buffalo Narrows, Saskatchewan. However, many victim services programs in the remote, Aboriginal areas of Canada and Alaska are finding that initiatives such as family justice forums and circle sentencing have very positive results for victims when they are carefully planned and implemented.

It is important to note, however, that these initiatives can be harmful to victims unless: ^[37]

• there is a skilled mediator or facilitator in charge of the process;
• the victim clearly understands the restorative justice process and her/his rights under the law;
• the victim agrees freely to participate, without coercion from the offender or community;
• the victim is fully supported before, during and after the process;
• the process includes local community service providers as well as the family and supporters of the offender and victim, and any justice personnel; and
• the short and long-term safety needs of the victim are addressed.

When these criteria, or “best practices,” are met, respondents to this research state that restorative justice initiatives can have the following positive results:

• they allow the victimized individual(s) an opportunity to fully disclose the impact of the crime in their lives in a safe and public arena;
• they ‘level the playing field’ between the victim and offender, as the story of the victim becomes as important to the satisfaction of justice as the story of the offender;
• they increase the likelihood of the victim’s control and power over her life and lessen the feelings of fear and helplessness, which aids the overall recovery process;
• they make public the experience of the victim, which increases community ownership over the safety and health of community members; and
• the presence of the offender, family members, justice personnel and service providers validates and normalizes the emotional, spiritual, financial and physical devastation felt by the victim.

Progressive Legislation

Examples from both Alaska and the Yukon Territory highlight the importance and relevance of progressive, victim-oriented legislation. Yukon service providers interviewed during this research report that women have told them that the Family Violence Prevention Act has both saved their lives and allowed them previously unavailable choices in terms of safety and recovery. The Alaska Victim Services Coordinator reports that their various victim notification systems have received very positive evaluations from communities and individual victims. Alaska’s legislation guaranteeing immediate financial aid to victims of crime has obvious advantages.

Progressive legislation may not be considered a “direct service.” However, without it, victim services providers and victims alike have fewer choices, and face a much increased risk of constant re-victimization. Analysis of the experience in the provinces and territories which have passed their own domestic violence legislation shows that related factors in implementing such legislation, i.e., required infrastructure links, ongoing training of all personnel, and public education and information are key in the successful use of such legislation.^[38]

Legislative initiatives can become “best practices” because:

• they directly address the immediate physical and financial needs of victimized individuals and families;
• they address the immediate and long-term safety needs of victims;
• they can tie victimized people into the justice information networks (i.e., victimized people become ‘part of the loop’);
• they can increase the legal status of victims and guarantee them rights and recourse under the law which, in turn, increases their control over their lives; and
• they address traumatic reactions in victimized people as they deal directly with the isolation, fear, panic and helplessness, which result from traumatic experiences.

In summary, “best practices” in victim services delivery are reliant on:

• the implementation of a community development approach to service delivery built on the community’s requests and recommendations for program design and delivery, and builds on relations between the community and the service providers;
• the development of appropriate short- and long-term victim recovery programs that enable victimized people to take or regain control of their lives; and
• a foundation of progressive legislation.

2.5 Recommendations for Victim Services in Nunavut

2.5.1 Introduction

The recommendations discussed in this section are the result of several different consultation processes. The telephone survey of all Nunavut service providers included a question on recommendations regarding potential victim services in Nunavut. In addition key Nunavut service providers (listed in Appendix A) received the previous section describing victim services “best practices” in other remote Aboriginal communities. Their feedback on these victim services initiatives in other jurisdictions, combined with their own insights into service delivery in Nunavut, resulted in further recommendations. All of these recommendations form the basis for this section.

In addition, the 2001 Northwest Territories Victims Assistance Conference took place in Yellowknife during the collection phase for this project. This research project was able to take advantage of the discussions at that conference. The recommendations of the delegates are incorporated here.

Recommendations for improved services to victims in Nunavut can be divided into four categories. These categories are:

• training, support and recovery for existing service providers;
• training, support and recovery for communities;
• leadership, legislation, judicial and correctional systems; and
• victim services programs.

The recommendations in this section are preceded by direct quotations from statements made during the telephone and in-person interviews of respondents in Nunavut.

^[37] This is especially important in domestic violence so that restorative justice processes do not provide another pressure to stay within an abusive or potentially abusive family relationship. See Naomi Giff , Nunavut Justice Issues: An Annotated Bibliography, RR2000-7, Ottawa, Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada, 2000; and Crnkovich, Addario, Archibald, Inuit Women and the Nunavut Justice System, RR2000-8, Ottawa, Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada, 2000.

^[38] Tim Roberts, Review of Provincial and Territorial Family Violence Legislation and Implementation Strategies, 2002.

Previous Page | Table of Content | Next Page