INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

1

Examining the Intersection of Indigenous Youth in Care and Law Enforcement:
Challenges, Solutions, and Collaborative Strategies

Okeoghene Rita Fasuyi
Post-Baccalaureate Diploma in Law Enforcement, Justice Institute of British Columbia

Author Note
This paper was completed for LAWS 4003: Research Project, taught by Kelsea Perry.
This paper is 8015 words and was submitted on November 22nd, 2024.
I would like to express my profound appreciation to my instructor; Kelsea Perry, staff
of JIBC Library and Writing Centre for their unwavering support and guidance throughout
the writing of my Capstone Paper.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

2

Abstract
The disproportionate representation of Indigenous youth in Canada’s child welfare system
and their frequent interactions with Law Enforcement underscore deep-rooted structural
challenges. My paper seeks to address critical research questions: What are the structural
barriers faced by Indigenous youth in care when dealing with Law Enforcement, and how can
the objectives of cultural safety and partnership be realized in improving the relationship
between Indigenous youth in care and Law Enforcement agencies? Employing a
transformative research approach, my study integrates a review of academic and nonacademic literature and government reports to comprehensively understand these systemic
issues. Focused on Western Canada, where disparities are most evident because it has the
highest representation of Indigenous youths in care and disproportionate interactions with
Law Enforcement, my study compares similar contexts in the United States and Australia to
evaluate how various jurisdictions tackle challenges relating to child welfare, policing,
cultural safety with a view to applying the same transferable lessons to Western Canada. My
findings underscore the significance of adopting a continuum-of-care approach that integrates
welfare, policing, and educational services. My study concludes that consistently
implementing culturally competent practices, community-led initiatives, and equitable policy
reforms are crucial to achieving cultural safety and fostering meaningful partnerships.
Structural changes and sustained resource commitments are imperative to prevent the
criminalization of Indigenous youth and promote their overall well-being.
Keywords: Indigenous youth, child welfare, intergenerational trauma, Law
Enforcement, systemic racism, cultural safety, continuum of care, child welfare,
overrepresentation

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

3

Table of Contents
Table of contents………………………………………….………………………………….3
Introduction……………………………………….………………………………………….4
Background Information…………………………………………………………………….5
Literature Review…………………………………………….……...….….…………….…6
Overrepresentation of Indigenous Youth in Care…………………………………...8
Systemic Racism in Law Enforcement…………………………………………….10
Cultural Safety and Resilience…………………………………………………….11
Policy Gaps and Implementation Challenges…………………………………….13
Methodology………………………………………………………………………………13
Results…………….……………………….………………………………………….……16
Impact of Colonial Polices on Indigenous Family Structures………………………17
Lack of Cultural Competency in Policing……………………………………………18
Systemic Barriers to Accessing Services…………………………………………….19
Comparative Analysis: United States and Australian Contexts………….………….19
Discussion……………………………………………………………………….…………...21
Strengths & Weakness of Research………………………………………………….21
Limitations…………………………………………………………………………...22
Recommendations……………………………………………………………………….…...23
Conclusion………………….……………………………………………….…………….…25
References………………………………………………………………………….………...27

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

4

Examining the Intersection of Indigenous Youths in Care and Law Enforcement:
Challenges, Solutions, and Collaborative Strategies
During one of my trips to my physio appointment, while listening to CBC radio
(which happens to be one of my favorite radio stations), I heard Andrea Currie’s interview
where she discussed her current memoir, Finding Otipemisiwak (CBC Books, 2024). My
maternal instinct kicked in as I resonated with her story and this prompted me to rush to
CBC’s website later on as I had to go in for my appointment. Andrea, a Métis survivor of the
Sixties Scoop, shared her emotional journey of finding her Métis roots and reuniting with her
birth family. Hers was a tale of survival, identity, family and culture in the face of colonial
practices and Indigenous erasure. Reflecting on her childhood, Andrea felt alienated in her
adoptive family, but finding her brother, and learning about her Métis roots became
transformative to her. Her story buttressed the reality of many Indigenous youth today, who
experience similar trauma while navigating child welfare systems and interacting with Law
Enforcement. These interactions, marked by systemic racism and criminalization, often
compound existing emotional challenges, reinforcing cycles of distrust, disconnection, and
vulnerability. This encounter inspired me to choose the topic of how child welfare and Law
Enforcement interact with Indigenous youth, with a focus on the importance of cultural safety
and community partnerships for healing and resilience. The emotional and psychological
trauma faced by Indigenous youths in care heightens the urgency for reforms that prioritize
culturally responsive approaches, build trust among stakeholders, and empower Indigenous
communities to shape systems that support the well-being of Indigenous youth.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

5

Background Information
Indigenous youth in Canada experience diverse forms of oppression, particularly
within the child protection and policing systems. Although they make up only 7.7% of the
overall youth population, they account for 53.8% of all children in state care, this figure
continues to rise (Indigenous Services Canada, 2025). This overrepresentation reflects the
endless legacy of colonial practices, such as the “Sixties Scoop” and the “Millennial Scoop,”
which disintegrated family structures, severed cultural connections, and resulted in emotional
and psychological trauma for Indigenous youth (Hahmann et al., 2024). These systemic
challenges extend beyond child welfare, as the interaction between Indigenous youth in care
and Law Enforcement is frequently characterized by over-policing, racial profiling, and
punitive interventions for minor infractions (Clark, 2019).
Indigenous youth are disproportionately criminalized for behaviours associated with
unstable living conditions, poverty, and intergenerational trauma. In foster care, particularly
in group homes, Law Enforcement intervention is often used to manage behaviour that should
be addressed through therapeutic means, perpetuating systemic inequalities and reinforcing
criminalization (Zinger, 2022). These punitive approaches not only alienate Indigenous youth
but also fail to address the root causes of their behaviour. Scholars argue that insufficient
culturally sensitive practices within these systems hinder youth recovery from trauma and
sustain narratives of neglect and criminality (Palmater, 2011; Barker et al., 2015).
The economic and social marginalization of Indigenous families further increases
their vulnerability to child welfare involvement, with poverty-related challenges often
misinterpreted as neglect (Government of Canada, 2019). Interactions with Law Enforcement
reinforce patterns of exclusion, maintaining structural discrimination and contributing to the
over-criminalization of Indigenous youth. Therefore, it is essential to analyse child welfare
and Law Enforcement as interconnected systems to fully understand the structural barriers

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

6

faced by Indigenous youth. Viewing these systems as a unified framework allows for a more
comprehensive analysis and supports the development of culturally sensitive
recommendations, including restorative justice practices, trauma-informed care, and
community-based partnerships.
The primary focus of my research is to examine the experiences of Indigenous youth
in care when they encounter Law Enforcement and the effectiveness of culturally safe
interventions. Research has shown that Indigenous youths are overrepresented in child
welfare systems and experience higher rates of criminalization, which makes both systems
demand an extensive review. The purpose of my study is to fill a gap by bringing together
social service organizations and Law Enforcement to work on collaborative culturally
sensitive approaches to addressing the issues concerning Indigenous youth.
By approaching these co-occurring systems as a single entity, it becomes evident that
change requires cross-sector collaboration and culturally sensitive reforms. Child welfare
agencies, health care, Law Enforcement, and Indigenous communities must work together to
address these challenges effectively. Andrea Currie’s memoir, Finding Otipemisiwak, serves
as a powerful reminder of the emotional toll that disconnected family structures and systemic
racism take on Indigenous youth. Currie’s journey of reclaiming her cultural heritage and
reuniting with her family illustrates the transformative impact of culturally rooted healing and
community support. Drawing from her story, my paper argues for integrated systems of care
that foster cultural safety, empower Indigenous youth, and build trust among all stakeholders.
These reforms are essential not only to break cycles of criminalization but also to ensure that
Indigenous youth receive the care and support needed to thrive within their communities.
To guide my study, the following research questions have been formulated: What are
the structural barriers that Indigenous youth in care encounter with Law Enforcement and

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

7

how can aims of cultural safety and partnership be achieved in enhancing the relationship
between Indigenous youth in care and Law Enforcement agencies?
I have raised these questions as it is important to understand the theoretical and
practical challenges Indigenous youth face and identify relevant and sustainable strategies to
address them. The goal of my study is to offer practical insights into encouraging culturally
safe practices and building collaborative partnerships between social services and Law
Enforcement to improve outcomes for Indigenous youth.
My research paper will contend that systemic issues exist within child welfare and
Law Enforcement, and how they influence Indigenous youths’ disadvantage. It will be argued
that Indigenous children are overrepresented in care not only as a statistic but due to social
injustice based on colonialism and current policies that neglect the needs of Indigenous
children.
My paper will consist of a literature review of previous studies focusing on the issues
of Indigenous youths in child welfare and Law Enforcement along with an analysis of other
subsequent research to identify new themes and findings. To provide a global context, the
literature review will include a comparative study of both child welfare and Law
Enforcement systems in the United States and Australia. Last, it will provide culturally
sensitive practice strategies such as trauma-informed care and community-based programs, to
support the recovery and well-being of Indigenous youth. It will also advocate for policy
reviews to encourage interdisciplinary partnerships between Indigenous communities and
service providers that would achieve a continuum of care for Indigenous youth.
In summary, my research study should help expand the current knowledge base of
alleviating and addressing Indigenous youths’ vulnerabilities when in care and enhance the
models for Law Enforcement interaction. My paper combines literature from related studies

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
with the intent of mapping potential strategies for the improvement of Indigenous youth’s
situation in Canada.
Literature Review
My research study identifies the vulnerability faced by Indigenous youths in Canada,
especially in the child protection and policing systems. According to Anderson (2021),
Indigenous youths between 15 to 24 make up 17.5% of the First Nations population, 16.0%
of the Métis population and 18.4% of the Inuit population; the share of the non-Indigenous
population was put at 12.0% (see Figure 1 for analysis).
In the same vein, it was stated in the Government of Canada database that there was
an overrepresentation of Indigenous youth in care as 53.8% are in care out of about 7.7% of
the total number of youths (Indigenous Services Canada, 2025) (see Figure 2 for more
emphasis).
This is a persistent problem that can be attributed to colonialism, racism, and socioeconomic oppression in the past and the present. My literature review shall therefore present
an evaluation of themes, issues, and discussions that have been left out in the existing
literature, and shed light on common issues that affect Indigenous youth to inform policy
direction and enable partnerships.
Overrepresentation of Indigenous Youth in Care
Indigenous youths are significantly overrepresented in the child welfare services in
Western Canada than the national average (Hahmann et al, 2024). This is an issue because
factors such as poverty and those that hinder the accessibility of social amenities including
healthcare and counselling to First Nations youths trigger their criminalization. For instance,
in Manitoba, Indigenous youth make up 90% of children in care even though they represent
only 25% of the youth population. This overrepresentation is not due to present-day policies
alone; foundations are set deeply in colonialism, and systemic racism (Palmater, 2011;

8

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

9

Samuels-Wortley, 2021). My study reveals that Indigenous families are enlisted for child
abuse or neglect, for reasons like poverty or substance use (Barker et al., 2015; Heid et al.,
2022). Scholars have argued that framing child protection policies through a colonial lens
rooted in the dispossession and marginalization of Indigenous people has resulted in systemic
inequalities that mirror the broader social inequities Indigenous communities face today.
These structural deficiencies in the child welfare system are intimately connected to the
historical legacies of colonialism and racism, where Indigenous ways of life were devalued
and marginalized under the premise of European superiority.
The debate about the effectiveness of current child protection strategies has been
ongoing as critics contend that these policies are disconnected from Indigenous cultural
practices, leaving families without the resources necessary to address underlying challenges.
This lack of culturally relevant services results in families being over-monitored and
prematurely subjected to intervention, compounding their difficulties (Feir, 2016). As a result,
the high rates of child apprehension not only undermine Indigenous family cohesion but also
perpetuate historical patterns of displacement, further alienating children from their cultural
heritage and community ties. Addressing these gaps requires a shift from punitive
interventions toward culturally responsive strategies that focus on supporting families and
preventing unnecessary apprehension.
This theme reveals a central tension within the literature while child welfare agencies
emphasize protection and safety, Indigenous communities advocate for systems that
recognize and respect their cultural practices. The debate underscores the need for systemic
reforms that align child welfare practices with Indigenous worldviews, focusing on
prevention, support, and family preservation rather than surveillance and removal. Bridging
this gap will require meaningful partnerships between child protection services and

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

10

Indigenous communities, ensuring that policies address the socio-economic realities faced by
Indigenous families without resorting to unnecessary interventions.
Systemic Racism in Law Enforcement
Indigenous youth are disproportionately likely to come into contact with Law
Enforcement, not because they commit more crimes, but because they are more likely to be
surveilled, stereotyped and criminalized for minor infractions (Clark, 2019). This systemic
racism is evident in the fact that Indigenous youth are more likely to be arrested for
behaviours that would typically result in a warning or diversion for non-Indigenous youth.
The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP, 1996) identified three principal
causes of the over-representation of Indigenous peoples in the criminal justice system:
colonialism, socioeconomic marginalization, and cultural conflict. To this day, Indigenous
people suffer because of the ever-lasting oppressive systems colonialism introduced and all
the intergenerational trauma it caused. This intergenerational trauma is at the root of poverty,
inequities in education, and often lack of mental health services that just serve to perpetuate
the cycles that trap so many Indigenous youth within child welfare and Law Enforcement
systems (National Collaboration Centre Aboriginal Health [NCCAH], 2015). Research
indicates that the nature of institutional barriers to Indigenous youth escaping from the
criminal justice system is continuing, but are unable to address many underlying socioeconomic causes (Palmater, 2011).
The theme suggests some differences of perspectives in the interpretation by Law
Enforcement of Indigenous youth behaviours, opening up debates. The impoverished
Indigenous communities are regularly criminalized and made to look deviant but the truth is
that oftentimes the structural, social-economic causes around history should be studied to
understand why certain people gravitate towards anti-social behaviour. Studies have shown
throughout the years that Law Enforcement sees Indigenous youth, as criminally deviant,

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

11

often overlooking the fact many of them take part in such activities because they are living
with systemic poverty and reconciliation issues such as relocation to non-Indigenous foster
homes (Trevethan and Maxwell, 2019). Instead of receiving trauma-informed therapies, these
Indigenous youths are labelled as "troublemakers" or "high-risk", and they end up being
further stereotyped and placed in a cycle of distrust, anger, and increasing Law Enforcement
scrutiny (Samuels-Wortley, 2021). This labelling effect further compounds the isolation of
Indigenous youths from mainstream society and places huge blocks on their re-entry. This
leads to confrontations between Law Enforcement and Indigenous youths based on cultural
insensitivity.
The confrontations between Indigenous youth and Law Enforcement speak to an
intricate brew of systemic racism, a lack of cultural competency as well as socio-economic
inequity. Failing to transition towards trauma-informed, culturally safe practices will prevent
more generations of Indigenous youth from having trusting relationships with Law
Enforcement. Overcoming these challenges will entail structural reform around increased
cultural competency development and cooperation between Indigenous communities and
Law Enforcement, with such efforts grounded in comprehensive implementation that is
spread across provinces.
Cultural Safety and Resilience
Cultural safety and resilience are core elements that need to be addressed to overcome
problems related to Indigenous youth. Trevethan and Maxwell (2019) and the Government of
Canada (2019) make it clear that culturally safe practice in child welfare and or policing leads
to better outcomes for Indigenous young people. Cultural safety acknowledges native culture
and practice which then fosters hope and recovery.
Currently in British Columbia, the progressive policies of child welfare have emerged
with Indigenous children being adopted into Indigenous communities thereby reducing

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

12

cultural alienation (Government of BC, 2022) as experienced by Andrea Currie in her
interview where in her words,
We were both Métis Sixties Scoop kids, although we had no idea of that at the time,
but what we did know is that we did not feel acceptable or that we belonged in that
family. It seemed like our adoptive mother was always disappointed in us and there
was some way that we were supposed to be that we just could not measure up to.
(CBC Books, 2024)
These words by Andrea are peculiar to the thoughts of other Indigenous youths and
encourage the need to have a continuity of culture to ensure that families are united. Another
good example is Alberta Indigenous Policing Services which has begun implementing
cultural sensitivity training for its personnel promoting restorative justice instead of
retributive justice (Government of Alberta, 2024).
However, programs like Alberta’s Indigenous Policing Services highlight the
potential for restorative justice to reduce youth criminalization, but without widespread
adoption and consistent policy support, such initiatives remain fragmented and isolated. As a
result, the gap between policy intent and practical outcomes remains a critical issue, raising
questions about the scalability and sustainability of culturally safe practices in both child
welfare and policing. Addressing these gaps will be essential for building meaningful
partnerships between Indigenous communities and the institutions that serve them, ultimately
enhancing the well-being and outcomes of Indigenous youth.
Policy Gaps and Implementation Challenges
The problem continues to persist even with positive laws such as the Act Respecting
First Nations, Inuit, and Métis Children, Youth, and Families, but as it is known, there is a
huge policy–practice gap. Feir (2016) and Rioux (2021) argue that, despite having positive
legislation, organizations have not applied them to effectively promote positive practices.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

13

There is therefore a need to place a great emphasis on the implementation,
and enforcement mechanisms coupled with the need to mobilize resources to better the lives
of the Indigenous peoples. Comprehensive services should be aimed at providing a
continuum of care to Indigenous youths in care to address their unique needs and offer longterm support instead of fragmented short-term interventions (Blackstock, 2011).
Understanding and responding to these challenges that affect Indigenous youth in care
requires collaboration with agencies, Law Enforcement officers as well as Indigenous people.
My study emphasizes the need to invest more in the implementation and compliance
processes as well as the utilization of appropriate resources to improve the circumstances of
Indigenous populations.
Methodology
My research embraces a transformative paradigm based on the struggle for social
justice (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). For studies involving Indigenous youth in care and Law
Enforcement brutality, the transformative approach is most appropriate because it was
developed on marginalized populations and its goal is to instigate change to oppressive
systems. The transformative paradigm challenges the systems of oppression; therefore, it is
considered appropriate for understanding how colonialism persists in affecting Indigenous
youths negatively in the spheres of child protection and justice. Unlike the more descriptive
or passive stance, this worldview might suggest, that a culturally safe approach to dealing
with Indigenous communities necessarily favours the creation of systems-level change over
replicating detrimental structural arrangements.
Owing to the Indigenous people's concerns about Indigenous-related topics and due to
the Law Enforcement authorities' past with Indigenous people, my study has adopted strict
research ethical principles. One anticipatory tension I took into consideration is the
appropriateness of representation of how Indigenous people are depicted. Although I utilized

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

14

only secondary sources, it can be considered ethical according to the principles of the OCAP
(Ownership, Control, Access, Possession). OCAP maintains that Indigenous communities
should solely have the authority over how information about them should be managed to
prevent misuse or violation of peoples’ rights to control their information.
In maintaining ethical issues-cum-limitations of secondary research relating to the
credibility and applicability of the obtained data, I ensured that the selection of the data
sources reflects the Indigenous-led interest where authors are Indigenous or the general
authors have studied Indigenous knowledge and problem sensitivity. I carefully avoided
relying on any data that tends to portray a negative image or profile of the Indigenous people.
In my paper, I performed secondary research using a uniform framework to seek as
many academic and non-academic resources about Indigenous youth in care and their
dealings with Law Enforcement. The databases used were Google Scholar, JSTOR, PubMed,
and Sage. I cross-referenced all articles with the JIBC library to ensure their reliability.
I used the following keywords to identify relevant literature: "Indigenous youths in
care," "Indigenous child welfare," "Law Enforcement," "systemic racism," "cultural safety,"
"Western Canada," "Indigenous-Law Enforcement relations," "overrepresentation of
Indigenous children in care," and "overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the Canadian
criminal justice system." My search was restricted to articles published within the last 15
years to align with current happenings. An overview of the literature search process is shown
in Table 1.
To refine the initial search of 107 articles, I applied several criteria. Only studies
directly addressing the intersection of child welfare and Law Enforcement involving
Indigenous youth were selected to ensure relevance. Articles featuring empirical data, both
quantitative and qualitative, on systemic issues and interactions between Indigenous youth
and Law Enforcement were prioritized. Preference was given to studies that included

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

15

Indigenous voices or utilized culturally relevant frameworks, ensuring cultural
appropriateness in understanding these issues. Additionally, the geographical focus was
limited to Western Canada specifically British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba—where
overrepresentation rates of Indigenous youth in the welfare system are particularly high.
Using the aforementioned criterion, ensured that my study maintain a meaningful exploration
of the systemic issues Indigenous youth encounter at the intersection of child welfare and
Law Enforcement (see Table 2 for Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria).
Based on thematic analysis, I used a qualitative research approach to examining
patterns and themes of data. I employed the use of this method because it minimizes bias and
gives a deeper perspective on social issues such as Law Enforcement interaction and child
welfare disparities. The selected literature was organized into four critical themes: systemic
racism, over-representation of Indigenous youth in care, cultural competency, and policy
deficiency. The first step I took for each theme was to look for articles that shed light on the
challenges faced by Indigenous youth and the next was to find what scholars and
policymakers have come up with as the way forward. I commenced the thematic analysis
process by examining invariant keywords in the literature like Indigenous youth, colonialism
and contemporary child protection policies, and cultural responsiveness policing.
The foremost advantage of this type of secondary research method based on data
analysis is the fact that it provides a vast background for understanding Indigenous youths’
issues in care and their Law Enforcement interactions, presenting a diversified approach to
the systematic problem by drawing from literature publications, administration reports, as
well as Indigenous pieces. Although this approach enables the development of a more
comprehensive view of the phenomenon which would have been challenging to obtain
by adopting the research outcomes of only primary data collection that is based on the
availability of the interviewees, logistical, and ethical limitations; nevertheless, there are

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

16

some notable drawbacks, which is that my study heavily depends on secondary data that are
not necessarily the reflection of the current realities of Indigenous youth in care due to the
dynamic socio and political environments. Also, unlike in earlier decades, there are very few
research studies that captured the Indigenous-Law Enforcement relations in Western Canada
in recent years. Another limitation of my study is the geographical scope; while deliberate,
the study lacks information from the other parts of Canada that would provide meaningful
comparison data.
Results
My findings reveal that the Canadian Indigenous youths are subjected to systematic
barriers mainly being the Indigenous youths in the child welfare and policing systems. These
challenges result from complex socialization processes from pre-and-post-colonial
experiences relating to government institutions. For instance, Indigenous youth despite
forming 7.7% of every youth in Canada, constitute 53% child welfare system or care which is
an overrepresentation (Indigenous Services Canada, 2025). This is a result of colonialist
policies that include the “Sixties Scoop,’’ and the current “Millennial Scoop’’ which have torn
apart many Indigenous families and kept them trapped in cycles of poverty and Third World
(systematic) oppression. In addressing the research questions, my paper will reveal the
systematic oppressive realities of Indigenous youth and provide strategies that are culturally
responsive and grounded in the community to enhance Indigenous youth’s journey through
these systems.
Impact of Colonial Policies on Indigenous Family Structures
The overrepresentation of Indigenous youth in child welfare is deeply entrenched in
Canada’s colonial history. This practice-described as the “Sixties Scoop” was geared toward
the integration of Indigenous children into Euro-Canadian culture, causing extensive family
disintegration and diminished cultural identity. The aim of this policy was to prevent

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

17

Indigenous children from experiencing an Indigenous upbringing, an effective course of
action considering that it propelled family disintegration and eradicated cultural agency.
Along similar lines in “Millennial Scoop,” the number of Indigenous children taken away
from their families due to poverty-related reasons was much higher than for non-Indigenous
children, many times under circumstances that did not even warrant apprehension
(Government of Canada, n.d.; Palmater, 2011). For instance, Indigenous children make up
90% of the children in care in Manitoba, despite comprising only 25% of the province's youth
(Hahmann et al., 2024).
The First Nations, Metis, and Inuit children are most often removed from their homes
by child protection services for reasons such as poverty, substance abuse, or inadequate
housing. These factors are rooted in colonization and discrimination and not abuse and
neglect (Barker et al., 2015). Policies that criminalize Indigenous peoples for being poor
result in children being taken away from their families and homes entrenching a cycle of
trauma and a severance from culture. These structural barriers not only have a detriment to
Indigenous youth but also provide them with enhanced chances for contact with authorities.
Lack of Cultural Competency in Policing
Another area of major concern within the experiences of Indigenous youth with Law
Enforcement is the overall employment of culturally insensitive practices. Law Enforcement
interactions with Indigenous youth frequently exacerbate the problem as they are ignorant of
the history and socio-economic cycles that influence youths. RCAP has attributed Indigenous
Peoples’ over-representation in the Criminal Justice System as a result of colonialism, socioeconomic exclusion, and cultural misfit (Government of Canada, 2024). These factors make
up what can be referred to as systematic discrimination where they are constantly monitored,
racially profiled, and punished harshly for minor offences compared to non-Indigenous
youth.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

18

For example, self-identified Indigenous youth in care are often profiled by Law
Enforcement inappropriately and are arrested and incarcerated for such behaviours that are
attributed to their poor upbringing or shelter-less environment (Clark, 2019). This approach
merely fuels the strains that exist in the relationships between Indigenous people and Law
Enforcement and escalates criminalization processes.
The situation is not peculiar to Canada only. In Australia, the Suspect Targeted
Management Plan (STMP) has involved Indigenous youth through Law Enforcement
intrusive measures like home visits and other Street Searches that have been found unlawful
and discriminative (Sentas, 2023). Similarly, in the United States, Indigenous youth are
treated as culprits, randomly arrested, and ignored for their rights, giving way to systematic
injustice (Naveed, 2024). Those examples demonstrate the need for them to be policed in a
more culturally sensitive manner that acknowledges Indigenous youth as representatives of a
distinct population.
Systemic Barriers to Accessing Services
First Nations, Inuit, and Metis Young People in Canada experience exclusion from
healthcare, housing, and mental health support. Such systemic barriers tend to worsen their
exclusion and increase their contact with Law Enforcement. A major problem of Indigenous
youth is poverty thus they cannot afford basic needs and emergent services. When Barker et
al. (2015) examined the nature of the street involvement of youths they learned that 24% of
the youths involved were Indigenous, which is a clear demonstration of Indigenous youths
being at risk for homelessness. Such youth do not get adequate healthcare and mental health
services and end up in behaviours that get them into trouble with Law Enforcement.
According to the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC, 2012), a fundamental cause of
crime among Indigenous youth is trauma, the poor treatment that Indigenous youth receive,
for example in the criminal justice system leads to trauma. Indigenous youth experiencing

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

19

mental health troubles or homelessness may commit criminal activities which will result in an
encounter with Law Enforcement. Instead of providing tangible prevention and intervention
measures that explain such behaviours, the child welfare and criminal justice systems
perpetuate and reinforce Indigenous youth poverty and trauma by criminalizing the
experience.
Comparative Analysis: United States and Australian Contexts
In trying to better understand the intersection of Indigenous youth in care and Law
Enforcement, I did a comparative analysis firstly on the policies on Indigenous children in
Canada, the United States and Australia. An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit, and Métis
Children, Youth and Families (Government of Canada, 2019) establishes guidelines to protect
Indigenous children in the Canada while similar principles are found in USA’s (U.S.
Department of the Interior Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2016), and Australia’s Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Child Placement Principle (SNAICC, n.d.). See Table 3 for the
comparative analysis. Based on the aforementioned comparative analysis of Indigenous child
welfare policies, Canada could consider establishing consistent federal standards to ensure
cohesive cultural preservation practices across provinces, drawing inspiration from the U.S.
and Australia child welfare policies. It could also strengthen partnerships with Indigenous
communities which would enable more culturally attuned decision-making. If there is a
provision of increased, sustainable funding, it may empower Indigenous communities to
independently manage their child welfare systems effectively. Active efforts toward family
preservation will leverage family support in Canada to avert unnecessary removals from the
family unit. Improved data collection and training of child welfare staff in Indigenous cultural
sensitivity could improve accountability and prevent culturally insensitive practices.
Next, I look into the U.S. Tribal Healing and Wellness Courts, which appear to be a
model for a holistic, community-centred justice approach in integrating Native tradition,

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

20

federal, and tribal law, which focus more on rehabilitation and healing than punishment.
These communities comprise of members and their cultural practices and are geared towards
healing for the mind, body and spirit. This creates a sense of community responsibility and a
strong cultural identity (Mettler, n.d.; Naveed, 2024). This model is somewhat related to the
Koori Courts in Australia where the elders and Aboriginal community members participate
actively in the processes of the court. Koori Courts are state-level courts that foster a
culturally safe space for Indigenous people, especially youth, to interact with the legal system
in a way that respects their traditions and encourages their positive engagement with the
justice process (County Court of Victoria, 2020).
In Canada, Indigenous justice primarily involves implementation by the provincial
courts with some federal supervision regarding federal crimes. There are Gladue Courts (or
Indigenous Persons Courts) in Canada, which incorporate Indigenous perspectives in the
sentencing process. Those courts, formed after the R v. Gladue landmark decision, require
judges to consider historical and cultural contexts pertaining to Indigenous defendants, which
include the impact of colonialism, residential schools, and systemic discrimination. Like
Tribal Healing and Wellness Courts and Koori Courts, Gladue Courts seek rehabilitative and
culturally relevant solutions, though they operate within provincial jurisdictions.
However, unlike the more community-integrated approaches of the U.S. and
Australia, Canada’s Gladue Courts often lack consistent involvement from Indigenous elders
or community representatives. These courts rely heavily on 'Gladue reports' prepared by
professional writers, not members of the Indigenous community to make informed decisions
that may lower the possibility of cultural involvement. The Canadian approach is a step
toward culturally sensitive justice, although one might have hoped for a great deal more in
terms of community-based practice and elder involvement such as is quite common in the
U.S. and Australian systems. This comparative insight underscores a potential shift for

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

21

Canada to enhance Indigenous participation within its justice systems for more holistic,
rehabilitative outcomes.
Discussion
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Research
As a mother, this research was of particular importance to me. I could understand the
profound impact of family separation on these communities despite my cultural background;
imagining my own children taken from me built a raw connection to the topic that drove my
inquiry in search of ways to honour and uphold Indigenous families.
A key weakness of my paper was the semester's 14-week duration which did not
really allow for a full exploration of the depths of the topic. The time did not lend itself to
primary research which might have included interviews and lived experiences of Indigenous
youth and Law Enforcement. This restricted timeframe meant that I could only rely on
secondary sources, as, interviews with Indigenous Youth and Law Enforcement, was not
feasible. Invaluable perspectives went unearthed because there was a lack of firsthand
accounts; I think direct interviews would have greatly lent authenticity and depth to the
findings. Another weakness was in adapting to a professional research writing format, which
became fundamentally different from student-centred writing that I was used to. The
transition required gruesome time and effort and added extra pressure to the already the tight
timeframe.
Limiting myself to Western Canada presented additional limitations, as there was a
limited selection of articles specific to the region despite its high over-representation of
Indigenous children in welfare. The limited information also made it impossible for me to dig
deeper into the problems of the subject area. Furthermore, due to time constraints, a
comparative analysis between this region and the rest would have been added to the context

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

22

in discussing Indigenous Youth in care and their intersection with Law Enforcement in the
country.
Limitations
In choosing the articles, the initial search produced more than 100 articles but due to
the exclusion criteria, the selected articles were published within the last fifteen years and
centred on Indigenous populations in Canada, Australia and the U.S. This may have excluded
potentially good research that may have been done some years back, but contain important
information nevertheless. In addition, limiting the reviewed sources to peer-reviewed
publications might have produced a limited view of the concerns in question since the study
would not have considered Indigenous-led sources such as reports by Indigenous
communities or literature published in Indigenous-specific journals.
Another limitation of my paper is the high level of similarity in my chosen articles, a
majority of which are centred on urbanized Indigenous youth, but exclude those in rural or
reserve environments. An extension of this analysis into broader geographical locations could
further expand an understanding of the ways systemic issues show variance across different
settings.
Though, it is realized that a mixed method of research might have improved the study,
including both qualitative results from interviews or focus group discussions with
quantitative outcomes would be more comprehensible to illustrate the challenges Indigenous
youth encounter hence extending our comprehension of the interactions Indigenous youths
have with child welfare and Law Enforcement. Future research could incorporate such
methods to get a clearer picture of the Indigenous young people’s experiences.
Recommendations
If we are to bring about enduring change for Indigenous youths in child welfare and
justice systems, there is a need to rethink a continuum of care framework that is culturally

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

23

respectful, community-driven, and profoundly interconnected. Including cultural sensitivity
into every stage of the care process guarantees that Indigenous youth get consistent, coherent,
and culturally relevant support throughout child welfare, education, health, and Law
Enforcement.
A Call for Culturally Responsive Collaboration
Imagine the difference it would make if every interaction Indigenous youth
experience in Law Enforcement or child welfare included cultural understanding and respect.
According to research work done by Heid et al. (2022) and Trevethan and Maxwell (2019),
culturally safe practice leads to less criminalization and fosters community trust. The
introduction of mandatory Indigenous cultural safety training for Law Enforcement officers
and child welfare workers, conducted by highly respected Indigenous elders, can make a
difference in this regard. Proactive, restorative solutions, rather than punitive measures for
lower-level offenses, should be emphasized. Rather than invoking fear, when Law
Enforcement deals with truancy using empathy and restorative justice, that builds trust and a
relationship with Indigenous youth. This insignificant modification empowers Law
Enforcement to build genuine trust by making them seem as a partner rather than an enforcer.
Strengthening Policies and Accountability
Designed to safeguard Indigenous youths, An Act protecting First Nations, Inuit, and
Métis children, youth, and families (Government of Canada, 2019) have had varying
provincial application which has slowed its impact. There is need for a committed national
agency to supervise policy implementation within child welfare and Law Enforcement if we
are to really honour the obligations under the Act. It is also necessary that Indigenous voices
are brought into advisory boards that provide real-time feedback for accountability purposes
Regular feedback loops with community members ensure that services remain culturally
relevant and adapt to the evolving needs of Indigenous youth and families.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

24

Advocating for Community-Driven Solutions and Restorative Justice
The best measure of reducing Indigenous youth overrepresentation in care and in the
criminal justice systems is the community-driven initiative. As with other programs proposed
by the National Crime Prevention Centre (NCPC, 2012), this strategy also stresses that
Indigenous communities should be engaged and enabled to drive the development of
solutions that address the issues they face. The programs from restorative justice such
as those being run under Indigenous systems in Alberta are known to decrease or halt
recidivism as well as bring healing to the affected individuals (Trevethan & Maxwell, 2019).
Expanding Research and Understanding
To create truly impactful programs, we need a commitment to gather detailed data
that captures the full extent of these issues as there is a significant gap in our understanding
of the systemic challenges Indigenous youth face. Recent data by Hahmann et al. (2024) and
Anderson (2021) hardly scratches the surface and this brings to the realization for a much
deeper tailoring of interventions to respond to the actual needs that could give way for
empowerment and upliftment of Indigenous Youth.
Indigenous-Led Case Management for Lasting Support
Indigenous-led case management teams could achieve continuity in care, where
trained social workers, educators, health professionals, and Law Enforcement officers who
are Indigenous provide a consistent support network that can guide young people in foster
care through to adulthood, linking them with mental health services, educational resources,
and community support, ensuring they never feel alone or unsupported. Indeed, if every
Indigenous youth had a constant culturally informed support team through transitional life
stages, they would feel they have a sense of belonging. With such a team, Indigenous youth
would have allies advocating for their well-being every step of the way.
Conclusion

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

25

In conclusion, my paper addresses a very critical necessity for a culturally related
continuum of care to counter systemic challenges indigenous youth face in Canada's child
welfare and Law Enforcement systems, especially those in British Columbia, Alberta, and
Manitoba. Through a review of relevant literature and secondary data, I have established
systemic racism, historical and continuing, as primary and uncomplicated catalysts to these
challenges. It is underscored that culturally responsive approaches are of utter importance if
one is to effect meaningful engagement between Indigenous youth and Law Enforcement.
Andrea Currie’s story, shared in her CBC interview, underscores the profound
importance of reclaiming heritage, family, and identity which are key elements for effective
care systems for Indigenous youth. Her experience illustrates the psychological toll of forced
disconnection from culture and family through colonial policies like the Sixties Scoop.
Currie’s reflections reinforce the importance of a continuum of care—bridging welfare,
health, education, and justice sectors—to provide consistent, culturally sensitive support.
Sustainable support for Indigenous youth relies on a cohesive system that values cultural
continuity at every stage.
A practical continuum of care involves collaboration among child welfare agencies,
Law Enforcement, educators, and community leaders to create culturally safe spaces. These
partnerships reconnect Indigenous youth with their cultural identities, lowering
criminalization risks and promoting personal growth.
Yet, Canada can further enhance Indigenous participation by integrating more
community-based practices and elder involvement, as seen in the U.S. and Australia. While
Canada’s Gladue Courts are a step toward culturally sensitive justice, they often rely on
“Gladue reports” prepared by trained writers rather than direct community member
involvement. Strengthening elder and community involvement would enrich Canada’s
approach, offering a more inclusive, rehabilitative framework.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
In essence, establishing a continuum of care is not only about service provision but
also about honoring cultural identity at every stage. Andrea Currie’s story is a call to action
for systems that support Indigenous youth by connecting them to their cultural roots and
empowering them within networks that foster trust, healing, and resilience.

26

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

27

References
Anderson T. (2021). Chapter 4: Indigenous youth in Canada. Portrait of youth in Canada:
Data report. Statistics Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/42-280001/2021001/article/00004-eng.htm
Barker, B., Kerr, T., Nguyen, P., Wood, E., & DeBeck, K. (2015). Barriers to health & social
services for street-involved youth in a Canadian setting. Journal of Public Health
Policy, 36(3), 350. https://doi.10.1057/jphp.2015.8
Bureau of Indian Affairs. (2016.). Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA). U.S. Department of the
Interior. https://www.bia.gov/bia/ois/dhs/icwa
Blackstock, C. (2011). The emergence of the breath of life theory. Journal of Social Work
Values and Ethics, 8(1).
https://www.jswve.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/10-008-109-JSWVE-2011.pdf
CBC Books. (2024, October 18). Finding Otipemisiwak is the story of family, identity and
reconnecting with a stolen heritage. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/books/findingotipemisiwak-is-the-story-of-family-identity-and-reconnecting-with-a-stolen-heritage1.7356195
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and
mixed methods approaches. Sage.
County Court of Victoria. (2020). Koori court: Fact sheet.
https://www.countycourt.vic.gov.au/files/documents/2020-05/county-koori-courtfact-sheet_0.pdf
Clark, S. (2019). Overrepresentation of Indigenous people in the Canadian criminal justice
system: Causes and responses. Department of Justice Canada.
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/jr/oip-cjs/oip-cjs-en.pdf

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

28

Feir, D. L. (2016). The intergenerational effects of residential schools on children’s
educational experiences in Ontario and Canada’s western provinces. International
Indigenous Policy Journal, 7(3), 1-44. https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2016.7.3.5
Government of Alberta (2024). Indigenous policing services.
https://www.abmunis.ca/advocacy-resources/social-issues/policing-hub/indigenouspolicing-services
Government of BC. (2022). Historic changes to B.C. child-welfare laws lay the path to
upholding Indigenous jurisdiction [Press release].
https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2022PREM0061-001594
Government of Canada (2019). An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children,
youth and families. https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f-11.73/index.html
Hahmann, T., Lee, H., & Godin, S. (2024). Indigenous foster children living in private
households: Rates and sociodemographic characteristics. Statistics Canada.
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/41-20-0002/412000022024001-eng.htm
Heid, O., Khalid, M., Smith, H., Kim, K., Smith, S., Wekerle, C. (2022). Indigenous youth
and resilience in Canada and the USA: A scoping review. Adversity and Resilience
Science, 3(2), 113-147.
Indigenous Services Canada. (2025, February 17). Reducing the number of Indigenous
children in care. Canada.ca. https://sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1541187352297/1541187392851
Mettler, K. (n.d.). Healing native youth through youth justice reform. Indigenous Policy
Journal, 34(1). https://www.indian-affairs.org/uploads/8/7/3/8/87380358/2023-0215_youth_justice_reform_article_for_website.pdf
National Collaboration Centre Aboriginal Health. (2015). Indigenous Children and the Child
Welfare Systems in Canada. https://www.nccih.ca/docs/health/FSChildWelfareCanada-EN.pdf

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

29

National Crime Prevention Centre. (2012). A statistical snapshot of youth at risk and youth
offending in Canada. Public Safety Canada.
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/ststclsnpsht-yth/ssyr-eng.pdf
Naveed, H. (2024). US Supreme Court reaffirms tribal sovereignty: Major decision will help
keep native children and parents together. Human Rights Watch.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/06/16/us-supreme-court-reaffirms-tribal-sovereignty
Palmater, P. D. (2011). Stretched beyond Human Limits. Canadian Review of Social Policy,
(65/66), 112-127.
Rioux, S. (2021). Indigenous youth, criminal justice and foster care: A scoping review of
proactive, preventative initiatives (Doctoral dissertation, Mount Saint Vincent
University). https://hdl.handle.net/10587/2187
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Report of the royal commission on
Aboriginal Peoples: Vol. 1 – looking forward, looking back.
https://data2.archives.ca/e/e448/e011188230-01.pdf
R. v. Gladue, [1999] 1 S.C.R. 688. Retrieved from https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scccsc/en/item/1695/index.do
Samuels-Wortley, K. (2021). To serve and protect whom? Using composite counterstorytelling to explore Black and Indigenous youth experiences and perceptions of the
law enforcement in Canada. Crime & Delinquency, 67(8), 1137-1164.
Sentas, V. (2023). Unreasonable, unjust, oppressive’: how a law enforcement program
targeted Indigenous kids. The Conversation.
https://theconversation.com/unreasonable-unjust-oppressive-how-a-Law Enforcement
-program-targeted-indigenous-kids-216627

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT
SNAICC (n.d.). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child placement principle. Retrieved
November 7, 2024, from https://www.snaicc.org.au/our-work/child-and-familywellbeing/child-placement-principle/
Trevethan, S. & Maxwell E. (2019). Crime prevention in Indigenous communities: An
examination of culturally-relevant programs and culturally-competent evaluation
approaches. Public Safety Canada.
https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/2023-r009/index-en.aspx
Zinger, I. (2022). Office of the Correctional Investigator Annual Report 2021-2022.
https://oci-bec.gc.ca/en/topic/overrepresentation

30

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

31

Table 1
Literature Search Process
Search Term(s)

Database(s) Used

Initial Results

Inclusion Criteria

Final Articles Selected

Articles focusing on
Google
Canada, Western
"Indigenous youth

Scholar,

in care"

JSTOR,

30 Canada published in

8

the last 15 years,
PubMed
peer-reviewed
Relevant to
"Law Enforcement Google
Indigenous policing
and Indigenous

Scholar,

30

5
practices, empirical

youth"

JSTOR
studies
Articles addressing

"Cultural safety in

JSTOR,
18 cultural safety,

child welfare"

2

PubMed
policy analyses

"Systemic racism

Google

Articles focused on

of Indigenous

Scholar,

17 systemic challenges,

people

JSTOR

overrepresentation

"Indigenous

3

Articles discussing
JSTOR,

resilience and

12 resilience,
PubMed

criminal justice"

prevention programs

Note: This table was prepared by me through a systematic search focusing on articles
published within the last 15 years. I selected the final articles based on their alignment with
the study's objectives, providing a well-rounded selection of resources for further analysis.

2

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

32

Table 2
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Criteria

Inclusion

Focus

Indigenous peoples and youth in Canada

Relevance

Relevant to child welfare and Law Enforcement

Exclusion
Studies not related to Indigenous peoples
Papers not addressing child welfare or Law
Enforcement issues

Methodology

Sound and credible research methodologies

Studies with unreliable or weak methods

Peer Review

Peer-reviewed academic articles and sources

Non-peer-reviewed articles or informal sources

Recent data or research (within the last 15
Timeliness

Outdated data or studies older than 15 years
years)

Geographical

Canada (with comparisons to U.S. and

Studies unrelated to Canada, U.S., or Australian

Scope

Australia)

contexts

Note. A table for employed Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

33

Table 3
Comparative Analysis of Child welfare Polices in the US, Canada and Australia
Aspect
Name of
Policy/Law

Enactment
Jurisdiction

Placement
Preferences

SelfDetermination

U.S.A.
Canada
Indian Child Welfare An act respecting First
Act (ICWA)
Nations, Inuit, and Métis
children, youth and
families
1978
2019
Federal, with tribal
Decentralized, selfintervention
governance for
communities
Specific hierarchy
Emphasis on cultural
favoring Indigenous continuity, flexible
placements
placement
Recognizes tribal
sovereignty in cases

Australia
The Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander
Child Placement
Principle (ATSICPP)
1984
State/territory-based,
with some variation
Hierarchy with
preference for
Indigenous
placements
Emphasizes
partnership, varies by
state
Inconsistent
application; funding
and training gaps

Affirms Indigenous
control over welfare
services
Implementation State compliance
Funding/resource
Issues
varies; legal
limitations;
challenge
intergovernmental
coordination
Note. Canada could consider drawing inspiration from the U.S. and Australia to establish
consistent federal standards for an Indigenous child welfare policy to include cohesive

cultural preservation practices across provinces. Information for U.S.A. from Indian Child
Welfare Act (ICWA) by Bureau of Indian Affairs, 2016,
(https://www.bia.gov/bia/ois/dhs/icwa). Copyright 2025 by U.S. Department of the Interior.
Information for Canada from An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children,
youth and families by Government of Canada, 2019, (https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/f11.73/index.html). Copyright 2025 by Government of Canada. Information for Australia from
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander child placement principle, by SNAICC, n.d.,
(https://www.snaicc.org.au/our-work/child-and-family-wellbeing/child-placement-principle).
Copyright 2025 by SNAICC.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

34

Figure 1
Proportion of the population aged 15 to 24 years by Indigenous Identity, Canada, 2016

Note: In 2016, those aged 15 to 24 made up 17.5% of the First Nations population, 16.0% of
the Métis population and 18.4% of the Inuit population; the share was 12.0% for the nonIndigenous population From “Chapter 4: Indigenous Youth in Canada” by T. Anderson, 2021,
Demographic section (https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/42-280001/2021001/article/00004-eng.htm). Copyright 2021 by Her Majesty the Queen in Right of
Canada as represented by the Minister of Industry.

INDIGENOUS YOUTH IN CARE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT

35

Figure 2
Proportion of Indigenous Youths in Care

Note: In Canada, 53.8% of children in foster care are Indigenous, but account for only 7.7%
of the child population according to Census 2021. From “Reducing the number of Indigenous
Children in Care,” by Indigenous Services Canada, 2025, Indigenous Children in Foster care
section (https://sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1541187352297/1541187392851). Copyright 2025 by
Government of Canada.