Monica Wysotski a Mohawk from Akwesasne introduces the 60’s scoop, in the wake of residential schools. Asking to meet with other First Nations people in Canada who share a similar experience with being taken from their homeland and raised in another culture and another identity. She would like to document on film with willing participants what the 60’s scoop share in common with the abuses and harms of residential schools and create a forum for healing.
Tag Archives: Children
n another effort to assimilate aboriginal children into Anglo-society, the Canadian government took thousands of children from their families during the 1960s and adopted them into White families. Producer Chieu Luu went to Winnipeg, Manitoba and spoke to one survivor of the so-called “60’s scoop,” reporter Rob Reynolds voiced the package.
I borrowed this from someone I know. I thought it would be good to share with you. Gives you something to think about when your alone.
Did you know the people that are usually the strongest are usually the most sensitive?
Did you know the people who exhibit the most kindness are the first to get mistreated?
Did you know the one who takes care of others all the time are usually the ones who need it most?
Did you know the 3 hardest things to say are I love you, I’m sorry, and help me.
The 60’s and 70’s Scoop was a terrible time and for many of us we are still looking for that place we call ” Home”.
Scott is now Serving time in Angola Prison in the state of Louisiana. He has never met his Canadian Family.
Please click the link at the bottom of this page to help Wilfred Allan Sutherland , Also known as Scott Meyer return home.
HELP CANADIAN 60’s SCOOP VICTIM FIND A HAPPY ENDING…AND A NEW BEGINNING!
For many years, the Canadian government seized babies and children of Aboriginal First Nation tribes, and adopted them out to Canadian and American couples of different races. In the early ’90s, this genocidal endeavor was exposed, though it still occurs. As a result, and with much effort, many of these long-separated families have been reunited, some decades later.
Happy endings? Not always. Relocated children suffer badly, studies have shown. Not only from the way in which they were taken (sometimes literally ripped from their mothers’ arms), but also from loss of identity. As a result, many of them suffer from mental illness or incarceration. The Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, ratified by both The U.S. and Canada in 1983 and enacted in 1985 was successfully utilized to transfer most, jailed in the U.S., home to serve their sentences reunited with their families.
Happy endings? Again, not always. For the Sutherland family of Manitoba, one of their seven seized children remains jailed in Louisiana. [http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Camperville+child+scoop+exposed.-a030590820] Despite four unsuccessful attempts by the Canadians, as specified by the Convention, to have him transferred to a prison near his family, a fifth request is now underway. This man is an accomplished scholar, artist, orator, and musician. The facts of his conviction and the excessive sentence he received (149 years) are questionable, at best.
This petition shall be delivered to the Governor and the Secretary of the Department of Corrections of Louisiana and both shall be asked to please fix this now!
It is my sincere hope to quickly gather enough signatures, from Canada, the U.S., and abroad, to impact the recipients in a way that they shall have no choice but to remedy the situation immediately. I appreciate your help in signing and sharing the word in an effort to achieve this goal as quickly as possible. Thirty-five years is long enough for him to wait to see his family!
Upon successful conclusion of this matter, I am quite sure he will be eloquent in scribing his own thanks to you all.
Therefore, I hereby present this urgent petition for your signature:
Dear Governor Jindal and Secretary LeBlanc:
Fundamental human rights are of concern to peoples of all nations. Thankfully, there are many structures in place to protect them, such as human rights treaties. The success of all human rights treaties in guaranteeing individual human rights, whether at the international or national level, or at the state level here in the United States, depends on familiarity with the treaties and adherence to them by authorities.
The United States is a member of The Council of Europe, and signed its treaty, the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, ratified in 1983. The Convention was specific: its primary intent was to facilitate the social rehabilitation of a prisoner by giving a foreigner convicted of a criminal offence the possibility of serving his or her sentence in his or her own country, which is also likely to be the country into which the prisoner will eventually be re-integrated.
Unfortunately, Governor Jindal and Secretary LeBlanc, there is a case pending in Louisiana for over three years that shows blatant disregard for the Council of Europe’s Treaty. And this despite your vow earlier this year, according to a recent Advocate article [State’s Budget Shortfall May Affect Efforts to Reduce Recidivism, by Michelle Millhollon http://theadvocate.com/news/872921-64/prison-jobs-training-program-faces.html%5D, “to focus more on better preparing offenders to re-enter society, saying that is a cheaper alternative to housing them behind bars if they relapse into crime.”
The Louisiana Department of Corrections estimates that while it costs $19,888 to house a state prisoner for a year, it costs $80,000 to house an ailing inmate. (http://louisianaprisonwatch.blogspot.com/2011/06/louisiana-legislature-votes-to-parole.html) Assume 38-year-old Meyers remains incarcerated at Angola – and healthy – for another 40 years. By releasing him now, you will save Louisiana tax payers close to $800,000!
Canada has been requesting the transfer of Angola inmate Scott Meyers, but the requests have been ignored. Mr. Meyers, born Wilfrid Allan Sutherland in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, was stolen from his mother’s arms at the age of 4 during the Canadian “60s Scoop” effort to eradicate his native Aboriginal First Nation tribe. He was “adopted out” to a New Orleans family, and was raised there, an only child, never forgetting the day he was ripped away. There is no doubt the psychological impact of this horror had a lot to do with the events that led to his incarceration. His family in Canada has been located, and both the family and Mr. Meyers would like him to be transferred to a prison near them to serve out his time, so that he may finally have a chance to meet and get to know the family he lost so long ago.
Former Governor Foster abided fully with the same Council’s tenets back in 2001, signing off on the transfer of Ms. Terese Terre to France. Governor Foster no doubt acted under LA Code of Criminal Procedure, Title XXX, Chapter 1, Article 892.3, which authorizes the governor of Louisiana to act on behalf of the State and to consent to the transfer of such convicted offenders under the provisions of Article IV., Section 5(A) of the Constitution of Louisiana.
We, the signers of this petition, hereby beseech you, Governor Bobby Jindal, and you, Secretary James M. LeBlanc, to immediately, and once and for all, sign off on the International Transfer paperwork required to return Scott Meyers (Mr. Sutherland) to his native homeland.
In the early 1980s, following the notorious Sixties Scoop, in which many children were removed from aboriginal families for adoption by non-aboriginal parents, the Manitoba government established a Review Committee on Indian and Métis Adoptions and Placements. Judge Edwin C. Kimelman chaired the Committee. In 1984, “After reviewing the file of every Native child who had been adopted by an out-of-province family in 1981, Judge Kimelman stated: ‘having now completed the review of the files… the Chairman now states unequivocally that cultural genocide has been taking place in a systematic, routine manner’.”
1984 File Review Report of the committee in 1981 over 53% of the children placed outside of the Province of Manitoba were sent to the United States and over 86% of the children placed in care of adopted families and foster homes outside of Manitoba were aboriginal ancestry.
File Review page 51
In No Quiet Place, Kimelman J. describes the Province of Manitoba’s approach to aboriginal child welfare as being a continuation of policies, approach, and attitudes of Indian residential school era stating: “ with the closing of the residential schools, rather than providing the resources on reserves to build ecomonic security and providing the services to support responsible parenting, society found it easier and cheap to remove the children from their homes and apparently fill the market demand for children in Eastern Canada and the United States” (No Quiet Place, page 330)
Chief Judge Edwin C. Kimelman of the Provincial Court, Family Division, to head an inquiry into the child welfare system and how it affected Aboriginal people. In his final report, No Quiet Place, Chief Judge Kimelman concluded that the Aboriginal leaders were right; the child welfare system was guilty of “cultural genocide.
Chief Judge Kimelman advocated a drastic overhaul of the child welfare system in Manitoba. Some of his recommendations included:
• That Aboriginal child and family services agencies be notified whenever an Aboriginal child came into care.
• That policies and standards be implemented that would improve repatriation of Aboriginal children to their own communities and reunify Aboriginal children with their own families.
• That more, and more appropriate, resources be devoted to allow for placement homes in Aboriginal communities.
• That greater support be given to Aboriginal agencies to help them provide services to their off-reserve populations.
• That greater use be made of the extended family.
• That adoption in a non-Aboriginal home be used only as a last resort.
• That cultural awareness training be provided to all those working in Aboriginal communities or with Aboriginal people.
• That there be a more vigorous and stringent court review of cases involving Aboriginal children in care.
• That a program of “affirmative action” hiring be instituted
Administered by the Child Welfare League of America and funded by a federal contract from the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the U.S. Children’s Bureau, the Indian Adoption Project lasted from 1958 through 1967. During an era when matching dominated adoption practice, it placed 395 Native American children from 16 western states with white families in Illinois, Indiana, New York, Massachusetts, Missouri, and other states in the East and Midwest. (Only 14 children were adopted by Southern families and one child was adopted in Puerto Rico.) Approximately fifty public and private adoption agencies cooperated with the project, but the largest number of children were placed by agencies that were leaders in African-American adoptions and services to children of color: Louise Wise Services and Spence-Chapin Adoption Services (both of New York) and the Children’s Bureau of Delaware.
Becuse tribes are legally considered sovereign nations, the incorporation of Indian children into non-Indian families constituted a kind of international as well as trans-racial adoption, paralleling the adoptions of foreign children from Europe and Asia after 1945. The Indian Adoption Project was perhaps the single most important exception to race-matching, an almost universal policy at the time. It aspired to systematically place an entire child population across lines of nation, culture, and race.
The project’s Director, Arnold Lyslo, and many other child welfare leaders viewed the Indian Adoption Project as an example of enlightened adoption practice, made possible by a decrease in the climate of racial prejudice that had formerly prevented the adoption of Native American children. “One can no longer say that the Indian child is the ‘forgotten child’,” Lyslo proudly declared upon the project’s completion. The Adoption Resource Exchange of North America (ARENA), founded in 1966, was the immediate successor to the Indian Adoption Project. ARENA was the first national adoption resource exchange devoted to finding homes for hard-to-place children. It continued the practice of placing Native American children with white adoptive parents for a number of years in the early 1970s.
A significant outcome study of families who adopted through the Indian Adoption Project was conducted from 1960 to 1968 by David Fanshel, a well-known child welfare researcher. Fanshel studied the motivations of parents and the outcomes for children in approximately one-quarter of all the adoptions arranged through the Indian Adoption Project. In Far from the Reservation, Fanshel concluded that the vast majority of children and families had adjusted extremely well, but he also anticipated criticism. “It may be that Indian leaders would rather see their children share the fate of their fellow Indians than lose them in the white world. It is for the Indian people to decide.”
In the late 1960s and early 1970s, Native American activists and their allies challenged the idea that the Indian Adoption Project was a triumph for civil rights and equality. They denounced the project as the most recent in a long line of genocidal policies toward native communities and cultures. Tribal advocates worked hard for the passage of the Indian Child Welfare Act, which reacted against the Indian Adoption Project by making it extremely difficult for Native American children to be adopted by non-native parents. In June 2001, Child Welfare League Executive Director Shay Bilchik legitimated Native concerns, formally apologizing for the Indian Adoption Project at a meeting of the National Indian Child Welfare Association. He put the Child Welfare League of America on record in support of the Indian Child Welfare Act. “No matter how well intentioned and how squarely in the mainstream this was at the time,” he said, “it was wrong; it was hurtful; and it reflected a kind of bias that surfaces
Good Morning and Welcome to The 60’s and 70’s Scoop. This Blog has been created by The 60’s and 70’s Scoop to bring us together and unite. We have been taken from our homes, families and lost our culture, traditions and our Language but, we have returned! It only takes a few minutes to get to know us and you will realize that we have a voice and a say to what happens to our futures. Together we can do something to make sure our inherit rights are protected and our voices are made clear. It’s time to take back what was stolen from us. Our Pride, Our Dignity, Our Love, Our Families, and Set our Spirits Free! Together we are strong, coming together with one unified voice.
We hope that you will find the information that you need to find out:
Who you are
Why This Happened
We hope that you can reunite with your families and be prepared for what might occur and for those of your returning to Canada we hope that you found enough information to get your life restated. If you have any questions please send me a message.