PSYC 3402- Final: Week 9

Settlement timeline

1. Indigenous Peoples arrive in Canada more than 20,000 years ago

2. Norse Vikings briefly visit Canada in the 11th century

3. French settlers establish New France in the 1500s

4. British colonists arrive soon after, the Hudson’s Bay Company promptly takes possession of Rupert’s land

5. 1759: Battle of the Plains of Abraham, British conquer New France

European settlement

• Massive depopulation (mainly the result of disease)

• Massive displacement in the 1800s

• Treaties negotiated unfairly

Colonialism

Exploitation, domination & subjugation of a people by an imperial power, replaced Indigenous knowledge with Western ideals

The Indian Act

• Paternalistic, ex. almost any band decision needed to be bureaucratically approved by the federal government

• Illegal for a band to hire a lawyer without government consent from 1927-1951

• Potlatch ceremonies outlawed between 1884-1951

• Intended to eradicate Indians

Colonial gender bias

1. A status Indian woman who married a non-status Indian man would lose her status

2. An Indian woman who married an Indian man outside her own band, ceased to be a member & instead became a member of his

3. If an Indian woman was widowed/abandoned by her husband, she would become enfranchised & lose status altogether

Residential schools

• More than 150,000 Indigenous children were forcibly removed from their homes

• Intended to “kill the Indian in the child” (forced to renounce their heritage, forget their language & convert their religion)

• Operated for over a century, 100+ schools over the country

The 60s scoop

• Occurred between 1951-1991

• Indigenous children were scooped up & placed in foster homes/adopted by non-Indigenous families

• Resulted in psychological, emotional & cultural consequences

Unmarked graves

• Found across Canada near residential schools

• To date: 1,800 confirmed (estimated 1/50 students died ~ 4.1k)

• TRC”s report resulted in renewed calls for criminal investigations

Indigenous communities today

• Many live under very bleak conditions

• Low access to education, health care & food

• Water advisories

Modern Indigenous conditions

• Average life expectancy is 6 years shorter than non-Indigenous Canadians

• Reserves would rank 68th out of 174 nations on the UN Human Development Index (Canada overall = 9th)

• 52% of children in foster care are Indigenous (only 8% overall)

• Inuit suicide is 11x higher than national average

• Indigenous Peoples on reserves are 4x more likely to be unemployed

• Indigenous Canadians earn an average of 1/3 less than non-Indigenous Canadians

• More than 4/10 Indigenous Canadians have not completed high school

• Less than 1/3 of First Nations reported being able to speak an Indigenous language

Overrepresentation

Indigenous incarceration rates are at a historic high, including:

• Youth even more than adults

• Violent convictions

• SIUs

• Parole

• Max security (small difference)

• Less likely to receive conditional release (more likely to be detained until WED)

Reasons for Indigenous overrepresentation

1. Differential CJS processing due to racial discrimination

2. Higher offending rates among Indigenous Peoples

3. Indigenous Peoples’ commission of offences more likely to result in prison sentences

4. Criminal justice policies that differentially impact Indigenous Peoples due to socio-economic conditions

Racial discrimination: over-policing

• Black divers are stopped more by police than white drivers, but only during the day when faces are visible (nighttime = equal rates)

• Black people & other minority males are carded more by police than white males (15-24 years old)

Racial discrimination: risk ratings

Even after controlling for the # of static risk factors, CSC staff are more likely to assign Indigenous offenders a high risk rating than non-Indigenous offenders on the Static Factor Assessment

Facial discrimination (systemic, but not overt)

• Access to lawyers

• Length of time in pre-trial holding

• Death in custody (neglect)

Racial discrimination: biased juries & judges

A Philadelphia study revealed that "‘stereotypically Black-looking’ individuals were more likely to receive the death penalty

Racial discrimination: PSRs

Report higher internal attribution for Black offenders, ex. anger & higher external attributions for white offenders, ex. abuse (internal factors increase sentences)

Indigenous offending rates

• Indigenous Peoples exhibit a higher overall crime rate and have more extensive contact with the CJS than non-Indigenous people

• Rates of violent crime are higher on reserves than in the rest of Canada

• More incarcerated Indigenous Peoples have youth court histories than incarcerated non-Indigenous people

• More incarcerated Indigenous Peoples have an adult court history than incarcerated non-Indigenous people

BUT: over-policing likely exaggerates this difference, Indigenous Peoples are more likely to be victimized.

Differential impact of CJS policies

• Indigenous Peoples are more likely to be unemployed & less likely to have a high school diploma (often items in risk tools)

• Fine defaults = prison time

Risk profiles of justice-involves Indigenous Peoples

• Indigenous offenders are significantly more likely than their non-Indigenous counterparts to have most of the static risk factors scored as present (especially when assessing criminal history)

• Some risk factors may function differently for white versus Indigenous Peoples (school & proscoiality = protective for white youth only, family adversity = risk factor for Indigenous youth only)

Recidivism

• Indigenous Peoples may recidivate at a higher rate than non-Indigenous people

• After controlling for Static-99R/STABLE-2007 scores, Indigenous offenders did NOT have significantly higher sexual recidivism rates than white offenders

• When accounting for risk scores, differences in recidivism rates become smaller/disappear altogether (Indigenous Peoples have more risk factors than non-Indigenous people)

Indigenous women

Typical profile:

• Abused/traumatized as a child and/or as an adult

• Suffer from internalizing mental health problems, ex, depression, anxiety, self-harming behaviour

• Traditional criminogenic needs

• Lower risk to re-offend than male counterparts (especially violently)

The nature of female criminal conduct

• Research only started in the 90s

• Males account for the vast majority of crime (especially violent crime)

• The gender gap is most narrow for non-violent crimes, ex. shoplifting, writing bad cheques, welfare fraud

The nature of female-perpetrated violence

• Rare but relational (against someone well known) in nature when it occurs

• More often motivated by intense emotions, ex. anger, jealousy, revenge, rather than instrumental reasons, ex. money

Are females getting more violent?

No

• The media sensationalizes rare & shocking cases

• Victimization data does not support the media/official police data that shows an increase in some areas (assault)

• Policy & police practices, ex. zero tolerance have disproportionately impacted females (more likely to be charged & convicted for crime than historically)

Why do women commit crime?

• Social learning theory (gender neutral theory applied to women)

• Pathways theory (girls enter crime because of negative life events, ex. childhood maltreatment, economic marginalization, dysfunctional relationships, which they cope with by running away/abusing drugs which leads to survivalist crime, ex. prostitution, drug sealing, robbery)

How do existing gender neutral risk assessment tools perform?

Very well

• LSI total score predicts equally well for both genders (substance abuse & personal/emotional factors are slightly stronger predictors for females & antisocial personality patterns predict slightly better for males, education/employment, family/marital, financial, accommodations, friends, leisure & attitudes all predict similarly)

Criticisms levied against gender neutral tools

• Risk over-estimation (high risk females do not equal high risk males)

• Context is not captured

• Family dynamics, transient living, older male peers/romantic partners, mental health factors, safety issues & children are not sufficiently weighed

• Tools created specifically for women are not used very often due to practical implications, ex. additional training required

Gender responsive moderate five

• Low self-worth

• Economic marginalization/poverty

• Parental stress

• Unsafe living situations

• Female-specific physical health needs

Latter four may be promising risk factors, but more research is required.

Other ethnicities

• Ignored in the research world & by the CJS until very recently

• Some studies find varying risk profiles (slightly higher risk scores, justice-involved Black youth abuse substances less than white youth, Black offenders are younger than white offenders at intake)