Indigenous Dispute Resolution & The Ethical Space of Engagement: Dibaajimotaadiwag (They Tell Stories)

Abstract

This study examines the transformative potential and limitations of Indigenous child welfare dispute resolution (ICWDR) circles within the broader child welfare system. Grounded in Ermine’s (2007) theory of the ethical space of engagement, it explores how ICWDR circles foster ethical relationality using Indigenous methodologies such as storytelling and ceremonial protocols as knowledge gathering tools. As a critical Indigenous scholar, in this thesis, my goal was to delve deeper into this phenomenon, especially when considering the legislated principles introduced in Ontario’s Child, Youth and Family Services Act (CYFSA, Government of Ontario, 2017), which have been politically framed as transformational tools aimed at reconciliation and the restoration of Indigenous authority over child welfare matters. The methodology employed for this study is centered on Indigenous research storytelling circles, following Indigenous circle protocols that honour participant autonomy. Over a four-month period in 2021, eight virtual research storytelling circles were held via zoom. In total twenty-three people shared their stories: fourteen self-identified as Indigenous from various Nations, and nine self-identified as non-Indigenous. The findings of this study emphasize the transformational role of tension and chaos within ICWDR circles, reframing these dynamics as catalysts for growth, mutual understanding and respectful engagement. Within these circles, Indigenous child well-being Shkaabas/helpers observed that families and the Indigenous community members found support and empowerment for respectfully holding workers accountable for unexamined assumptions that contribute to barriers to family reunification. Conversely, workers reflected on how their participation in these circles helped deepen their understanding of healing from an Indigenous perspective. These findings underscore the reciprocal healing potential of ICWDR circles, illustrating their capacity to foster teachable moments, raise awareness, nurture collaborative partnerships, and inspire moral courage – leading to creative strategies that improve outcomes for Indigenous children and families involved in the child welfare system and participating in these circles. Despite these promising benefits, the study also reveals that the child welfare system remains entrenched in colonial structures, which severely limit the transformative potential of ICWDR circles. Systemic barriers, including policy loopholes, organizational culture, and the discretionary power of child welfare professionals, continue to obstruct transformative efforts. Institutional resistance to Indigenous-led approaches remains evident, particularly through persistent lack of accountability for non-compliance with Indigenous-centered frameworks even when legislatively required to do so. While ICWDR circles offer a meaningful pathway toward transformation, their full potential is constrained by deeply entrenched systemic resistance, exposing the ongoing disconnect between governmental policy and its practical application. A significant contribution arising from this study is the development of an Indigenous metaphorical framework (p. 315), which emerged from the stories shared by the knowledge keepers, my practice experience, and the broader literature on Indigenous scientific methods. This framework uses metaphors and natural systems thinking to interpret the key findings and offers an Indigenous pathway for further studies aimed at exploring meaningful and morally courageous reform in child welfare policies and practices.