THE preamble of the review undertaken by the Southern First Nations child welfare authority into the death last year of Gage Guimond reads like an apologia. Not to be confused with an apology -- for the word "sorry" is quite absent -- the preamble, rather, appears to excuse, if not defend, the abject failure of the Sagkeeng child welfare agency and its workers to keep the toddler and his sister safe.
PDF report: Death of Gage Guimond (633k)
Gage Guimond died on July 22, 2007, the day after the cherubic tot with cherry lips turned two. The great-aunt he and his sister were placed with, a stranger to them both, now sits awaiting trial for manslaughter. Officials admit both children were abused in their foster home. The report, however, is devoid of any description of Gage's last days, how he died, contacts made (or not) in the run-up to the tragedy.
Rather, the preamble highlights the "atrocious and terrible" history between native people and mainstream child welfare authorities. It notes the "monumental task" in front of native agencies and communities in repairing the wounds, repatriating native children to the homes and communities, caring for those in need now that the child welfare work has devolved from a central, governmental model to one in which native agencies are overseen by a First Nations authority. "One can argue and illustrate the pitfalls to such a process but reality allows for those who see beyond the pitfalls."
It is a jarring message to launch the discussion of how a two-year-old in an agency's care became a victim of homicide in a home that agency chose. Clearly, some have moved beyond Gage's death. "The call to return to our teachings can be heard off in the distance, and footsteps of our ancestors can be heard coming down the halls of new developments. One can't help but be elated and ecstatic!"
Little Gage Guimond's life and demise are co-opted in a war call by the authority tasked with ensuring agencies follow the law, standards of care and procedures designed to protect children at risk. No longer is he the toddler who died because people charged with keeping him safe didn't do their jobs. Rather he is a "warrior for change."
But the report of the review makes abundantly clear that the holes in the management of the agency and the conduct of some workers were not mere "pitfalls." They were fundamental. They were yawning crevasses into which children fell with the most terrible of consequences. Gage and his sister were taken from a stable and culturally appropriate foster home in Selkirk and handed to a series of homes due to filial connections alone, then yanked due to neglect and risk.
There was no reason to pull Gage and his sister from their Selkirk home, where they had formed loving, solid bonds with parents, other than a worker's slavish adherence to the prevailing ethos in many native agencies that favours family ties. Gage's case worker diligently attended to the need to repatriate the native children, but paid fatally poor attention to the need to ensure the new homes were safe.
Gage's final home was not adequately vetted, the agency worker who placed him there and in the other dangerous foster homes was not trained for the work nor qualified for the position. That worker was promoted into the job by the Sagkeeng agency executive director, a close relative. Staff complained of the nepotism, but to no avail. When Gage died, the worker and most of the agency staff were in Calgary, ostensibly at a workshop. Staff complained about the expense -- $45,000 for five days. They didn't want to go. They were ordered to attend.
The report is a litany of failings of the agency, workers and officials, the fact provincial standards of care routinely were not followed, documentation not completed, workers not adequately qualified. The blatant nepotism at Sagkeeng depressed morale among staff who feared it would lead to risky decisions being made. People quit.
Among the 88 recommendations is one that is redacted as a "confidential" human resources matter. Presumably, the authority has advised that Sagkeeng's senior management ought to be changed.
The death of Gage Guimond cannot be excused nor contextualized in a historical discourse. Many native agencies in operation are not new to the job of keeping children safe. Indeed, Sagkeeng, which began in 1976, is Manitoba's oldest aboriginal agency. Native agencies, following the acquisition in 2004 of cases transferred from non-native authority, were inadequately staffed for the job but the failings at Sagkeeng in management and in the front line are rooted in philosophical, rather than structural forces.
The worker's intent to put Gage with family followed an article of faith that guides native child welfare in Canada. Unchecked by the more pressing concerns -- safety, bonding with a parent -- the worker yanked him from a loving home where Gage might have grown to be a happy, healthy young man.
Gage's death led to the rewriting of Manitoba's child welfare act, to expressly state a child's safety must be the first concern of authorities. This vulnerable boy cannot be claimed by any interest in search of a "warrior." Rather, his story is a rebuke to all those who cling to the conceit that culture and family cannot be separated from a child's most primal need.
Guimond report available at winnipegfreepress.com
PREVIOUS
