| Français | |
Contact us | |
Help | |
Search | |
Canada Site |
|
||||||||
| Justice Home | |
Site Map | |
Programs and Initiatives | |
Proactive Disclosure | |
Laws |
|
|
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
  |
 |
"Creating a Framework for the Wisdom of the Community:" Review of Victim Services in Nunavut, Northwest and Yukon Territories
Previous Page | Table of Content | Next Page 2.5.2 Training, Support and Recovery for Existing Service Providers
In terms of overall social service provision, respondents stressed the fact that there were not enough trained indigenous people at the community level to deliver a comprehensive network of social services, including services to victims. Those with training quickly become overwhelmed with demands and have few additional resources to call on. In this regard, respondents point out that increased assistance to victims has to build on the strengths of existing indigenous and non-indigenous service providers. These service providers need increased training, support and personal recovery opportunities if they are to cope adequately with the needs of victimized people. In their view, service providers working with victims need training in the following areas:
According to respondents the healing and recovery issues of existing and potential caregivers, and service delivery personnel, should include:
Furthermore, respondents pointed out that existing and potential victim service workers will need opportunities to expand their horizons in the following general areas:
In relation to the “best practices” described in the previous section, respondents note that “short and long-term victim recovery programs” cannot be delivered effectively at the community level without first providing healing and training opportunities to existing, and potential, victim services providers and community caregivers. Respondents also state that it will also not be possible to fully establish a “community development approach” to victim services, as described in the previous section, before dealing with the training and healing needs of existing and potential service providers. Several suggestions were made by respondents in terms of delivering the training, support and recovery opportunities necessary to building a core of long-term community services available to victimized people. These suggestions included:
2.5.3 Training, Support and Recovery for Communities
Respondents noted that there is a high need for greater community awareness about the needs, and even the existence, of victims of crime. This lack of awareness is complicated by the fact that in many communities it is difficult to get people to attend workshops or events that focus on issues related to crime, such as addictions, family violence, child abuse and parenting. Therefore respondents suggested the following methods of reaching out to community members with both information and encouragement:
In addition to developing community awareness, many respondents commented on the need to encourage greater cooperation amongst existing community agencies. They point out that police, health and social services, schools, hamlet offices, recreational groups, churches and other agencies need closer working relationships in order to address the needs of victims. Although it is not always the case, many of these service providers work in some isolation from each other. Recommendations for increasing service coordination at the community level include the following: the establishment of community interagency committees that include the services listed earlier as well as community justice committees, community wellness committees and existing non-government agencies such as family counselling centres, daycares, shelters; and the development of community wide strategic plans for addressing local problems with violence and crime through comprehensive service delivery. According to respondents the ideal approach in each community would include a victim services worker, a women’s shelter or safe houses, youth shelters and recreational facilities, family counselling and educational opportunities, in-home family support workers, drop-in healing centres with healing circles for each age group, in-school victim services for children and youth, child assessment and treatment options, long-term care for disabled children, crisis lines, homeless shelters, addictions programming, mental health services and increased public housing. 2.5.4 Legislation, Judicial and Correctional Systems, and Leadership
Legislation Most respondents who read the previous section describing victim services in other remote non-Nunavut Aboriginal communities felt that legislation, which protects the safety and rights of victims, as described in that section, is a worthwhile goal for Nunavut. In particular, most respondents referred to the Yukon Family Violence Prevention Act as legislation that has the potential of ensuring an effective method of immediate crisis intervention. In fact, several respondents felt strongly that improved legislation dealing with immediate post-crisis victim protection was the number one priority in terms of improving victim services in Nunavut. In this regard, respondents, several of whom are quoted above, stressed that there is an overwhelming need to make the rights of victims and offenders more equitable in the eyes of the community. They believe that victim rights legislation creates the basis for a more equitable human rights approach and is therefore essential to the eventual development of truly effective victim services at the community level. One respondent mentioned the victim notification legislation in Alaska as useful. However, the majority of respondents note that communities and victims in Nunavut are almost always aware of an offender’s release date and post-release plans; so there is less interest in legislation concerning victim notification. A few respondents, however, did have some cautions to add regarding legislation as it pertains to victims of crime. These respondents feel that victims of crime need the freedom to make their own choices regarding intervention in their situation. They don’t want to see victims put in a situation where they are legally forced to follow a particular course of action despite their own interests. These respondents are not opposed to legislation such as that in the Yukon. They just want such legislation to allow the victim the maximum amount of choice possible under the circumstances. Finally, in terms of legislation, respondents don’t want victims put in a situation where their chief role is in “shoring up the legal system.” Many respondents feel that victims have only been given credibility and assistance in relation to their role within the judicial system as witnesses. In short, respondents note that victims currently receive very little care or attention outside of what is necessary to make them credible witnesses for crown prosecutors. In this respect, community caregivers and advocates are not interested in legislation that would simply further the needs of the judicial system, and once again leave victims with no additional resources. Judicial System Respondents had several comments to make about the existing judicial system in Nunavut as described earlier. They are open to alternate methods of dispute resolution as described in the previous section. Restorative justice initiatives such as those available in Buffalo Narrows, Saskatchewan, (Buffalo Regional Victim Services), were seen as potentially worthwhile long-term goals. However, the majority of respondents feel that community justice committees, community caregivers and victim advocates, where they exist, need more training and support before they can assist victims with these alternate processes. Some respondents pointed out that current resources available to victims, such as Victim Impact Statements, are not being employed. They would like to see these, and other, basic victim services in place before proceeding with restorative justice initiatives, at least as they pertain to spousal and sexual assault. Most existing justice committees within Nunavut currently follow some restorative or alternative justice procedures. However, sentencing circles and offender diversion programs are used almost exclusively in cases of minor offences and with young people. While community justice specialists in Nunavut report that victims are sometimes involved in these procedures, in general, justice committees have not focused on victims of crime. In addition, in relation to existing and emerging alternate judicial processes, respondents point out that the existing bias against victims in many communities could, and often does, work against victims. Unless the victim has adequate trained support and/or some level of community support, she or he stands the chance of being re-victimized rather than assisted. Many respondents referred to the length of time it currently takes to process court cases and all felt that the long waits did not serve justice or the needs of the community, the victim or the offender. They want to see court cases dealt with more swiftly so that healing for all parties can get underway while the incident is still fresh. In terms of sentences given in the standard judicial process, respondents felt that sentences have been too light. Many respondents remarked that conditional and suspended sentences are inappropriate for child abuse, sexual assault and spousal assault and that these sentences send the wrong messages to offenders, victims and the community at large. In addition, many felt the Young Offenders Act was not being enforced properly. Finally, although it was not discussed in detail in the previous section, several respondents said they were interested in exploring the option of a Domestic Violence Treatment Option Court.[40] They have heard that this judicial option is being explored elsewhere and they wonder about its applicability in Nunavut where most crimes fall within the category of “domestic violence.” Leadership In relation to the discussion around family violence legislation, respondents also noted that the drafting and passing of victim support legislation in Nunavut would be difficult given the fact that the majority of elected leadership, both in the legislative assembly and within some Inuit organizations, have not made social problems, let alone the rights of victims, a priority. They went on to say that some officials at the territorial, community and regional level have been re-elected to positions of power despite their own convictions for abuse and violence. In this regard, respondents felt there should be a policy of “zero tolerance for violence,” a code of conduct and oath of office for elected officials within government and in organizations which protect the rights of Inuit beneficiaries. Respondents also had suggestions to make in terms of the involvement of elders and women at the leadership level. Some respondents believe that elders should be involved as advisors, at the community level, to any potential victim assistance program. They also feel that local Inuit spiritual advisors trusted by the community at large should play a leadership role in assisting victims. Suggestions were also made about increasing political education to women so they could take more high profile political leadership positions. [39] Process addictions are addictive behaviours that do not involve substance abuse. Co-dependence, gambling and sexual addictions are examples of process addictions. [40] The Yukon chapter of this paper describes the Domestic Violence Treatment Option Court operating in that territory. |
|
 |
|||
| Last Updated: 2005-10-22 |  |
Important Notices | ||