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

2. 2.0 Nunavut
2. 2.2 Traditional and Existing Informal Victim Services in Nunavut
1. 2.2.1 Introduction
2. 2.2.2 Traditional Approaches to Dealing with Victims in Nunavut
3. 2.2.3 Informal Contemporary Approaches to Dealing with Victims in Nunavut

Previous Page | Table of Content | Next Page

2.2 Traditional and Existing Informal Victim Services in Nunavut

2.2.1 Introduction

The purpose of gathering information on traditional Inuit ways of dealing with victimization is to explore approaches that may have worked in the past, and that therefore might be built into the design of any new victim-centred services. The purpose of gathering information on current informal ways of dealing with victims is to understand how gaps in contemporary formal services are being addressed. Given the degree of need, and the competing demands for limited resources, it is important to learn from, and to build on, the informal supports that have worked in the past, and continue to work in the present.

The information in this section is based on interviews with Nunavummuit, most of whom are currently key service providers in Nunavut. Their names are among those listed in Appendix A. Other respondents include women who were, or are, victims of interpersonal violence. The largest group of respondents are those community-based service providers contacted during the inventory of Nunavut service providers.^[16]

2.2.2 Traditional Approaches to Dealing with Victims in Nunavut

• “There would have been some intervention (into an abusive relationship) by a parent or elder who would counsel the abusive person about their thoughts and motivations.”
   
• “Rumours served as a social control mechanism.”
   
• “A lot of subtle, unspoken intervention took place, people did not want to be confrontational.”
   
• “They knew the offender would eventually have to face the consequences of his actions ... something would happen to him if it didn’t stop.”
   
• “They used to say, and still say, ‘its only a girl.’”
   
• “People tried to be non-aggressive and said ‘it can’t be helped.’”
   
• “Victims in the old days were blamed and abandoned to their fate.”
   
• “They knew in those days that there was always a bad apple in the group.”
   
• “People were afraid they would make the offender act even worse so they were gentle with him.”
   
• “Elders have to be obeyed.”
   
• “It was OK for the victim’s family to get revenge on the offender.”
   
• “People would not want a good hunter removed from the group no matter what he did to his wife and children.”
   
• “If the person got more violent, the elders would talk to him with more intensity.”
   
• “Elders never used shaming with people unless the violent man didn’t learn any other way.”
   
• “Women were treated the same way then as we are now ... like we don’t have feelings.”
   
• “Men still think it’s their right to have sex with whoever they want, whenever they want.”
   
• “One good thing about the white man coming here is that now when I’m beat up I can take a plane to the next town instead of having to walk.” 

Respondents report that people who were victimized in traditional times were dealt with in a variety of ways. There is universal agreement about some aspects of the common interventions used at that time, but there are also differing opinions about other aspects of this intervention.

Perhaps it is useful to state at this point that the terms “victim” and “offender” are English and reflect an understanding of justice that has grown out of European tradition. In European tradition, individual human rights have some precedence over collective human rights, perhaps as a result of very different social, economic and political conditions and traditions. Whatever the reason, it appears that interpersonal violence as it is understood in European tradition as a stand-alone “crime” was viewed in Inuit culture as the natural outcome of several generations of disharmony, wrong-doing, bad luck or incompetence afflicting the families in question. Or, it was viewed as the result of someone, not necessarily the family in question, abusing people or animals, or doing something else, which upset the natural pattern of existence.

It is important to remember the points made in section 2.1 of this chapter regarding cultural considerations. Nothing that happens is considered to be happening outside of the total context of life as it unfolds each day in all its various rhythms. Those people who appear to function poorly within this pattern, and thereby contribute less to the survival of the group, can only be understood in the context of everything, not just human relationships, that is happening now and has happened in the past.

Furthermore, according to respondents, individuals are considered free to make their own decisions as they see fit, within their understood gender, age and relationship roles and responsibilities. It is accepted that people are free to make their own mistakes within this framework, and thereby learn more accurately how to live their life in harmony with others and the natural world. Interfering in an individual’s learning process, according to people interviewed for this research, is considered intrusive and disrespectful. Confrontation is not considered a useful tool in shaping human behaviour, as it has the potential of damaging a person’s sense of personal identity and self-worth.

The following description of traditional Inuit methods of dealing with victimized individuals has to be understood within this cultural framework.^[17] Respondents interviewed for this research agreed with each other when they stated that women in traditional times (pre-contact with Europeans, but similar to European traditions at that time) did not have as much status as men. This did not mean that their family members and others did not love female children and adult women. However, women did not, as children or as adults, have the same decision-making power, or overall status within the group. Respondents report that it was a greater honour to give birth to boys than to girls and some respondents believe that some baby girls were allowed to die while others report that this is not true. However, most respondents agree that to this day female children are not as valued as male children. This may be due to the traditional reliance on men for their hunting skills. Female skills, such as the sewing of winter garments to make them wind proof, were also important factors in surviving the arctic winter. But without food no one survived.

Some respondents went even further to say that men considered women and girls to be for the most part sex objects and servants.^[18] Middle-aged and senior Inuit women and men interviewed during this research report that marriages were usually arranged for girls, and sometimes boys, at a young age. According to these respondents, girls married at a young age were most often very afraid of the men they found themselves living with. They were instructed by their families to obey these men and reported that their husbands very often forced sexual interaction on them. Girls and women who found themselves in these relationships were not usually allowed to return to their parent’s home.

Respondents believe, and some have heard and experienced, that women who complained to their families about the treatment they were receiving were often told it was their fault, and that they had to try harder to obey their husbands and be good wives and mothers. Some of those interviewed say that the beating and sexual assault of women, in their experience at least, was not uncommon, and although it upset others and disrupted family life, there were not a lot of options open to the women and children in question. Apparently some women attempted to leave their family camp and travel on foot to a nearby camp for refuge. However, there was little chance of survival outside an extended family unit given the climatic conditions and geographic remoteness from large urban centres, and even other camping groups. Therefore, keeping a family together at all costs was the primary objective and largely precluded attempts to escape violent situations.

According to some of those interviewed, parents and elders, in some family groupings, might try to intervene in violent situations. More senior family members might counsel the assaulting partner, in a non-confrontational manner. These elders made an attempt to understand the feelings, motivation and thoughts of the offender in question and then spoke to him in a subtle way about these feelings. If this did nothing to lessen the violent episodes, the offender would receive progressively more pointed and direct counselling from his seniors. However, every attempt was made not to cause shame or embarrassment to the offender as the belief was that the elicitation of these types of feelings was dangerous to the whole group. The reasoning was that if a person was shamed, embarrassed, directed and singled out for reprimand by elders they could become dangerously resentful and angry towards everyone, including their wife. So the focus, at least according to some respondents, was towards subtly redirecting the violent person’s thoughts and feelings into more constructive directions.

Although respondents did not universally agree, some said that the families of women who were assaulted were free to take revenge on the husband if he became violent. This might not happen immediately, in fact it might take years, but eventually family members might take an opportunity that presented itself to avenge the violent treatment of their female family member. However, the death or disabling of a valuable hunter was not of assistance to the group’s survival, let alone the survival of his own wife and children. While women did some of the fishing, most of the hunting was done by men. Therefore it appears that every means possible was employed to calm, redirect and control the violent behaviour before more serious intervention might occur.

Respondents also report that what is called “gossip” and “rumours” in the English language were also used as a mechanism of social control. Clan members discussed people who, by group standards, failed to behave appropriately. As it was shameful to be the brunt of this sort of attention, the passing of distasteful rumours likely had some affect on both victimized individuals and offenders. It may also be that the gossiping discussed by respondents served the purpose of ‘letting off steam,’ dealing in non-confrontational ways with anger, resentment, shame and fear.

2.2.3 Informal Contemporary Approaches to Dealing with Victims in Nunavut

• “I thought what he was doing was normal ... it was happening to everyone and my mother went through it ... we never discussed it.”
   
• “Some healing is about waiting.”
   
• “I had nowhere to go so I walked around town with the kids for a few hours and just waited till he passed out.”
   
• “I love spring camping and so do the kids ... we just let go and relax ... its not like being in town ... It's free.”
   
• “I was running around the truck with him chasing me with a knife and the police just watched.”
   
• “I went over to my mom’s, but she said I deserved what I was getting so I should just go back to him.”
   
• “He said I made him do it and I believed him.”
   
• “I feel like I’ve been depressed my whole life ... like I’m nobody and nobody cares.”
   
• “It happens to most women and in most families but no one talks about it.”
   
• “He sleeps around on me, so I thought I’d try it too, but it didn’t do anything for me.”
   
• “I don’t go to any counsellors in this town cause they all just gossip about you if you do.”
   
• “People say ‘she teased him so she deserves it.’”
   
• “I was pretty lucky cause I could always go to my sister’s place; her husband doesn’t hit her and I stay there for a few days.”
   
• “I take abusive men out on the land with me, and we pray together and sometimes we see angels and spirits trying to help us.”
   
• “I always feel better when we go out camping, and he never hits me out there either.”
   
• “The elders in this town are mostly pretty supportive ... they disapprove of violence in relationships.” 

Despite growing public awareness in Nunavut about spousal assault, sexual assault and child abuse, these crimes are still largely kept secret. Although some of these incidents come to the attention of the police or other authorities, it appears in talking to respondents that most victims do not report these experiences to anyone. Denial and avoidance are understandable and ‘useful’ informal methods of dealing with victims in circumstances such as exist within Nunavut, which include a lack of social service resources, high unemployment, isolation, endemic poverty, lack of housing, cultural upheaval and widespread victimization.

In addition, traditional beliefs about keeping the family together at all costs are very strong. And, beliefs about the culpability of the victim add to the strong tendency to keep interpersonal violence hidden, according to respondents.

The recent availability of safe recovery opportunities, such as healing circles and safe shelters, have given some victimized individuals the chance to disclose their experiences of sexual, physical and psychological abuse. But both formal and informal supports to victims of crime remain scattered and fragmented. Some victims report that they have received support from their children, friends, siblings, parents and in-laws. However, this informal support network is not universal and varies from one family, and one community, to the next. According to shelter workers, and others working with adult female victims, the majority of victimized women do not find a lot of open support within their immediate circle of family and friends.

Respondents consulted during this research report that victims of crime use the following informal methods of ‘dealing’ with their victimization:

• victimized children act out in school (and in other safe settings), abuse solvents, skip school and engage in petty crimes in order to focus attention on their inner struggle and traumatization;
• victimized teenagers run away and drop out of school, turn to drugs, alcohol, solvent abuse, early pregnancy, suicide, and crimes such as “break and enter” and assault, in order to focus attention on their situation;
• victimized women and men usually do not tell anyone about their situation until they have been assaulted over a period of many years;
• victimized women and men may also turn to various addictive behaviours such as gambling, drinking and promiscuity, in order to cope;
• some women and men (the percentage is unknown) are able to discuss their situation and/or find temporary accommodation with friends and family;
• victimized adult men do not have safe shelters and are often only able to disclose their situation if there are healing circles or local counselling services available to men; and
• children, teens and adults may act out their traumatization through abusive behaviour towards others (although victimization does not necessarily lead to abusive behaviour).

Children and adults of both sexes ‘deal’ informally with their own victimization through a range of symptoms and behaviours known as Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD).^[19] These symptoms include identity confusion, memory dysfunction, dissociation, mental disorientation, a wide range of emotional and psychological problems, relationship disruptions, sexuality dysfunction, a wide variety of physical symptoms, and a general loss of faith in life. Each individual unconsciously puts these symptoms together in a way that enables them to survive in their particular circumstances. These circumstances may be painful but they are at least predictable and familiar. In that respect, there is as much safety and happiness as the individual has come to accept as ‘normal.’

There are also more affirmative methods used by victimized individuals to cope with their situation. For example, some respondents report that prayer, and the intervention of angels and other helpful spirits, has made a tremendous difference in their lives, and in the lives of other victimized people they know. Others say that sports, sewing and traditional crafts, dancing and singing have proven useful tools in dealing with their victimization.

But perhaps the most universal method of informally coping with violent relationships, addictions and victimization has always been spending time away from the community, and sometimes one’s family, by going out on the land to camp, hunt, fish and trap. This can be difficult for individuals and families without snowmobiles or dog teams, and the other resources necessary to life on the land. However, respondents stated that it is the universal goal of most Inuit to spend as much time as possible away from the cares and problems of community life and replenish their psychic energy at favourite spots far from “town.”

Many individuals interviewed during this research report that they, and the people they know, feel completely revived, hopeful and alive again after even a few days camping. They report that being on the land in this way doesn’t necessarily solve their problems or alter their overall situation, but it does make it more bearable, giving them the energy to carry on.

According to respondents, families and communities tend to ‘deal’ informally with victims in a variety of ways. First and foremost, and according to all respondents, there is a great deal of collective and personal denial about the existence of interpersonal violence within families and communities. In these circumstances, it is also understandable when victims are dealt with informally through blaming and shaming, as well as denial. As noted earlier, shelter workers, and respondents in all other areas of social service delivery, report that the majority of victims are blamed for the abuse they suffer. Over time they learn to blame themselves. Blaming and shaming have the effect of silencing people, making them easier to control, undemanding of service or recovery (opportunities which are scattered at any rate) and obedient towards the existing private and public circumstances in which they, and their children must survive.^[20]

Respondents, however, also indicate that some communities have developed informal and formal methods of dealing with victims in ways that allow victimized individuals more choice and opportunity for safety and recovery. For example, respondents state that in some communities one or two families have opened their homes to assaulted women and children. Unfortunately, this system of informal shelter has often become unsafe for everyone involved. Providers are often forced to stop making their home available in this way when their house is shot at, or disrupted in other ways, by the partner of the women in question.^[21]

A variation of this type of informal refuge is, however, more readily available to children and teenagers. As large extended families exist in most communities, and because it is relatively common for young cousins, grandchildren and other family members to stay with extended and senior family members, victimized children and teens can sometimes find at least temporary safety and respite in the homes of their extended family. The percentage of children and teenagers for whom this is an option is unknown and will vary widely from family to family, and community to community.

Although they might be called “formal services,” communities have also attempted to deal constructively with community social problems through the creation of recreational opportunities. Most communities have arenas for hockey and skating. And most have recreation coordinators who work for the Hamlet Councils providing a variety of recreational programs through each season. Some Hamlet Councils also sponsor Community Justice Committees and Wellness Committees. While these committees have a mandate to offer formal services they also assist in the creation of increased community awareness about the needs of victims, thereby strengthening informal networks of support to victimized people.

Many churches in Nunavut also attempt to reach out informally to victimized individuals and families. Some of those respondents who discussed their own recovery from victimization reported that their religious faith and church had played a major role in their lives. They reported that their religious beliefs kept them functional and hopeful, and eventually helped them leave chronically abusive relationships. Others reported that the perceived religious ‘rules’ about staying with a partner ‘no matter what’ was a negative influence in their recovery.

^[16] The full list of Nunavut community-based service providers can be found in Victim Services in the Territories: A Compilation of Contacts and Resources, Mary Beth Levan, Ottawa: Policy Centre for Victim Issues and Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada, 2002.

^[17] Most of the inter-personal violence in Nunavut is male-to-female violence with most of this in the form of wife assault and sexual assault. Therefore this description focuses on traditional attitudes and behaviours towards women.

^[18] For more information see Aupilaarjuk, Mariano and Marie Tulimaaq, Akisu Joamie, Emile Imaruittuq, Lucassie Nutaraaluk. Interviewing Inuit Elders, Perspectives on Traditional Law, Nunavut Arctic College: Iqaluit, Nunavut, 1999.

^[19] For details on PTSD see Judith Lewis Herman, Trauma and Recovery, N.Y.: Basic Books, 1992.

^[20] This situation is not unique to Nunavut, it is universal. See United Nations Press Release GA/9723, Sad and Sobering Reality that Women Continue to be Deprived of Basic and Fundamental Rights, Special Assembly Told, June 8, 2000; and Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, General Assembly Resolution 34/180, September 3, 1981.

^[21] In southern Canada, the physical addresses of safe shelters are not made public for this reason.

Previous Page | Table of Content | Next Page