Sterilisation of Aboriginal Women in Canada: From Silence to Media Violence.

11.02.2023

Written by Clara Delhaye.

On 25 November 2022, a report by doctoral student Suzy Basile and Professor Patricia Bouchard on free and informed consent and sterilisations imposed on First Nations and Inuit women in Quebec was published^[1]BASILE, S., BOIUCHARD, P, (novembre 2022), « Consentement libre et éclairé et les stérilisations imposées de femmes des Premières Nations et Inuit au Québec  », UQAT, Rapport de recherche, … Continue reading. The report highlights the urgent need for national and international awareness of the issue of coerced sterilisations in Canada and the need for effective reproductive justice for Aboriginal women. However, despite this research, several articles, notably from the Aboriginal press^[2]JOSSELINE ML, (21 décembre 2022), « La stérilisation forcée de femmes autochtones : un drame qui dure depuis plus de 40 ans », Radio-Canada, … Continue reading, called into question the surprise that this type of research still generates in Canada. Thus, it is appropriate to ask why the forced sterilisation of Aboriginal women is still a little-known reality today.

Forced sterilisation in Quebec: an old, discreet and targeted practice

According to the International Federation for Human Rights’ Glossary of Sexual and Gender-Based Violence, coercive sterilisations “consist of the permanent deprivation of a person’s reproductive capacity without obtaining her or his genuine and informed consent, or when such an act is not required or justified by medical necessity^[3]« Consistent à priver de façon permanente une personne de sa capacité de reproduction sans obtenir au préalable son consentement véritable et éclairé, ou lorsqu’un tel acte n’est pas … Continue reading[loose translation]”. Two things should be emphasised in this definition: the permanence of the act and the absence of consent. The purpose of coercive sterilisation is manifold but is mainly understood as a “measure to prevent births within a group^[4]« mesure visant à entraver les naissances au sein d’un groupe » FIDH (2021), Violences sexuelles et basées sur le genre : un glossaire de A à Z, Guide,   … Continue reading [loose translation]” because of ethnicity, disability, standard of living^[5]For example, the sterilisations of poor women in the late 1990s in Peru or of black women in the United States from the 1930s to the late 1970s.…

Forced sterilisations were used in Canada from the 1930s onwards when several states enacted laws allowing the practice^[6]Comité sénatorial permanent des droits de la personne (juin 2021), La stérilisation forcée et contrainte de personnes au Canda, Sénat Canada, … Continue reading. These were rooted in the “eugenics” movement, which believed in improving the population through reproductive control, i.e. sorting out those who deserve to have children from those who do not. Through laws and records, it is possible to determine which women were targeted by these methods. These were people who were considered intellectually ‘deficient’, from a disadvantaged background and mainly female^[7]VEZINA, J (avril 2010),  « Les politiques de stérilisation sexuelle au Canada et aux États-Unis : une pratique à l’intersection de rapports de genre, de race et de classe », Université de … Continue reading. Indeed, if we read the State of Alberta’s law on sterilisation, it refers to people who present “a risk of a genetic defect that can be transmitted to their offspring^[8]Etat d’Alberta, (1928), The sexuel sterilization act, https://www.canlii.org/en/ab/laws/astat/sa-1928-c-37/latest/sa-1928-c-37.html”, and disability is therefore included. According to Professor Julie Vézina, who published a report on the issue of forced sterilisations in Canada, “the presence of an inadequate family environment^[9]« La présence d’un environnement familial inadéquat » VEZINA, J (avril 2010),  « Les politiques de stérilisation sexuelle au Canada et aux États-Unis : une pratique à l’intersection de … Continue reading” [loose translation] could constitute a justification for this practice. Finally, according to available statistics from the State of Alberta, “2,203 (46%) men were presented to the Committee for 2,582 women (54%). In the end, 64% of the women presented to the Committee were sterilised between 1929 and 1972, compared to only 54% of the men^[10]« 2 203 (46%) hommes ont été présentés devant le Comité pour 2 582 femmes (54%). Au final, 64% des femmes présentées devant le Comité furent stérilisées de 1929 à 1972 pour seulement 54% … Continue reading[loose translation]. Women were therefore more affected by these practices. And more particularly indigenous women were targeted because they were vulnerable, poorly integrated into the world of work and judged to be intellectually inadequate^[11]STOTE, K,  (17 avril 2019), Stérilisation des femmes autochtones au Canada, The Canadian encyclopaedia,  … Continue reading. It is estimated that they had “a 77% chance of being labelled as ‘mentally deficient’ while Anglo-Saxon/Canadians had only a 55% chance of being so diagnosed^[12]VEZINA, J (avril 2010),  « Les politiques de stérilisation sexuelle au Canada et aux États-Unis : une pratique à l’intersection de rapports de genre, de race et de classe », Université de … Continue reading”. These criteria depended on white realities and not on indigenous realities, thus exposing them to this violence^[13]BARTLETT J, BOYER Y, ( 22 juillet 2017), External Review: Tubal Ligation in the Saskatoon Health Region: The Lived Experience of Aboriginal Women, Saskatoon Health region,  … Continue reading. These are colonial and eugenic criteria, preventing the First Nations from having children and therefore from maintaining their social group. Although these practices seem ancient, they have continued until 2019^[14]BASILE, S., BOIUCHARD, P, (novembre 2022), « Consentement libre et éclairé et les stérilisations imposées de femmes des Premières Nations et Inuit au Québec  », UQAT, Rapport de recherche, … Continue reading.

The progressive interest of the media and public opinion in the forced sterilisations of indigenous women

Although sterilisations were legalised in the 1930s until the 1970s, they were not widely known in society. Indeed, the states of Alberta and British Columbia had passed Sexual Sterilization Acts in 1928 and 1933 respectively, 3 legalising sterilisations. Other states drafted bills that were not ultimately passed but paved the way for these practices^[15]DE BRUIN T, ROBERTSON G, (7 juin 2019), Eugénisme au Canada, The Canadian Encyclopédie, https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/fr/article/eugenique. These practices, despite their violence, do not seem to have raised more questions. This can be explained by the fact that because the violated population is not very vocal in Canada, these practices were not decried or publicised. After the abolition of these laws in the 1970s, medical personnel, particularly in “Indian hospitals”^[16]LUX M, (31 janvier 2018), Hôpitaux indiens au Canada, The Canadian Encyclopedia https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/fr/article/indian-hospitals-in-canada – segregated health facilities for Aboriginal people to prevent them from using traditional medicine – continued to perform forced sterilisations. As a result, the majority of the white Canadian population knew little of these facilities, so only First Nations and medical staff really knew what was going on. This increased the lack of awareness of the abuse long after it was prohibited by law.

Another explanation for the lack of media coverage is that many women were unaware of their sterilisation^[17]RICCI J, (22 novembre 2022), « Violences faites aux femmes et aux filles du Canada, un passé douloureux qui mobilise », Institut du Genre en Géopolitique, https://igg-geo.org/?p=9727&lang=en. Practitioners take advantage of childbirth or abortion to get them to sign a consent form to agree to be sterilised. It is estimated that “two-thirds of the women presenting to these hospitals for abortion were ultimately sterilised^[18]« Les deux tiers des femmes se présentant au sein de ces hôpitaux, pour un avortement, étaient en fin de compte stérilisées »VEZINA, J (avril 2010),  « Les politiques de stérilisation … Continue reading [loose translation]. In reading various testimonies^[19]JUNG D, (24 mars 2021), « Je ne me sentais plus femme », raconte une Autochtone stérilisée malgré elle, Radio Canada, … Continue reading, several women explain that they signed forms or agreed to the sterilisation operation immediately after giving birth. The sterilisations were thus conducted without their free and informed consent and in a state of limited awareness. Despite the violence of the act, which is not based on the free and informed consent of Aboriginal women, Canada has not changed the law. Only a Senate Human Rights Committee has introduced a bill to create the stand-alone offence of forced sterilisation. The committee issued a report on the issue which showed that, in addition to a virtually non-existent legal framework, forced sterilisations continue to take place^[20]Comité sénatorial permanent des droits de la personne (juin 2021), La stérilisation forcée et contrainte de personnes au Canda, Sénat Canada, … Continue reading. Yet, for several decades, in international law, these practices have been considered both as torture^[21]ONU, (26 juin 1987) Convention contre la torture et autres peines ou traitements cruels, inhumains ou dégradants, … Continue reading and as an act that can be classified as a crime of genocide^[22]CPI (1 juin 2002), Statut de Rome, https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/NR/rdonlyres/ADD16852-AEE9-4757-ABE7-9CDC7CF02886/283948/RomeStatuteFra1.pdf.

Moreover, forced sterilisations have only recently gained public attention. It was not until the late 2010s that the issue was finally addressed publicly. In 2017, a study conducted by Senator Yvonne Boyer and Dr Judith Bartlett showed that forced sterilisation of Aboriginal women was still taking place, particularly in Alberta and Ontario^[23]Boyer, Yvonne; Bartlett, Judith. 2017-07-22. External Review: Tubal Ligation in the Saskatoon Health Region: The Lived Experience of Aboriginal Women. … Continue reading. The following year, the Committee against Torture reported on forced sterilisations of Aboriginal women in Canada^[24]OHCHR, (22 novembre 2018), Le Comité contre la torture examine le rapport du Canada, https://www.ohchr.org/fr/2018/11/comite-torture-rapport-canada, based in particular on the research work of Bartlett and Boyer.

This gradually reached the international community. In 2019, Amnesty International released a report on the history of sterilisation of Indigenous women over decades in Canada^[25]Amnesty International, (1 avril 2019), Mémoire au Comité sénatorial permanent des droits de la personne dans le cadre de l’étude sur la stérilisation sans consentement, … Continue reading. Numerous testimonies are transcribed in these reports, allowing the women concerned to make the violence public. However, the process is slow, and although it is now a known and critical issue in Canada, recognition of the victims by the State is slow.

Recognition of forced sterilisations of Aboriginal women: between denial and progress

The fact that the issue has been brought to the international stage has not necessarily led to recognition and apology. Some states have apologised to these women, such as the Saskatoon Regional Health Authority^[26]Anonyme (28 juillet 2017), L’Autorité régionale de santé de Saskatoon s’excuse auprès de femmes autochtones stérilisées contre leur gré, Radio Canada, … Continue reading, which has stated that it is “sorry for the coercion of fallopian tube ligation that you have experienced in our health care system^[27]« désolée pour la coercition à la ligature des trompes de Fallope dont vous avez fait l’expérience dans notre système de santé ». Anonyme (28 juillet 2017), L’Autorité régionale de … Continue reading. The latter is also rooted in the Canadian eugenics and colonial movements. The same awareness can be expected for forced sterilisations.

This could lead to a transformation of the Canadian health and prevention system. Since hospitals have, for a long time and until recently, practised these acts, increased prevention for Aboriginal women, but also for professionals, seems essential. In this sense, many Aboriginal people are advocating for the implementation of the “Joyce principle”^[28]Principe de Joyce, https://principedejoyce.com/fr/index. This principle aims to ask medical centres and hospitals to respect traditional indigenous medicine and provide indigenous patients with care without discrimination and violence, including forced sterilisations. The Canadian states have not adopted this principle. However, its adoption would make it possible to alert and advocate for the treatment of Indigenous women in medical centres.

Other Aboriginal women have chosen to take legal action against hospitals that conduct these practices. In 2021, a class action was brought by a group of Atikamekw women from Manawan^[29]NADEAU J, (20 novembre 2021), Des femmes atikamekw qui allèguent avoir été stérilisées contre leur gré se tournent vers les tribunaux, Le Devoir, … Continue reading. This action focuses both on the negligence of hospitals and on the responsibility of hospitals for the lack of supervision of their health professionals. This action could also inspire other Aboriginal women to speak out and campaign for recognition of their experiences.

Hope for recognition of sterilised Aboriginal women

There is therefore a real, plural desire on the part of Indigenous women to develop better reproductive justice, a better health system and protection in the event of practices such as forced sterilisations. The taboo surrounding these forced sterilisations is gradually disappearing and questions the position of the federal state, which remains silent. However, the latter has not hesitated to acknowledge the violence against Uyghur women in China. This raises questions about the capacity of states to interrogate their history and the violence they have inflicted on minority women.