# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
First Thing: UN says 14,000 babies could die in Gaza in next 48 hours under Israeli aid blockade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UK, France and Canada warn Israel of action if ‘egregious’ conduct in Gaza continues. Plus, Trump and Putin discuss Ukraine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deep income poverty: Exploring the dimensions of poverty in Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Living under the poverty line means being unable to buy a basket of goods and services, like food, clothing and footwear, shelter, transportation, and other items. To further explore what is happening under the poverty line, the deep income poverty (DIP) line measures the cost of the most basic living necessities in a region and excludes other goods and services that many Canadians require but the poorest are most likely unable to afford. This paper uses the Canadian Income Survey to explore the deep income poverty in Canada as a measure between 2015 and 2022 and how it differs from the official poverty measure among sociodemographic groups. Poverty is a multifaceted issue and should not be summarized to a single indicator. While documenting the DIP measure, this paper also explores parallel indicators to complement the Market Basket Measure (MBM) of poverty.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Modern slavery, hidden in plain sight | Kate Garbers | TEDxExeter

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you think slavery is a thing of the past, think again. Millions of people around the world are trapped in modern slavery - and they could be working for you. In this powerful talk Kate Garbers makes the unseen seen and helps us spot the signs of modern slavery in our midst.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Right Stewardship as an Anecdote to Cultural Genocide

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ability to preserve and pass on our culture is essential to our humanity but how do we honor the past when land is concerned? In a talk that addresses the politics of space, land, and culture, meditation teacher and community organizer B. Anderson delivers an answer we need to hear in a way we’ve never heard it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change adaptation in Canada - Natural Resources Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Elizabeth McCormick: Bias Begins At Home: The Gender Inequality Dilemma | TED Talk

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Why haven’t we been able to make the progress we hoped for when it comes to gender equality in the 21st century? According to Elizabeth, it’s not the media or culture but our actions at home, how we divide household chores and what our kids learn from observing us that is responsible for the dismal progress we’ve made as a society.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you are in immediate danger or if you need help right away, call 9-1-1.

If you are under the age of 19 years old and want to talk to someone, you can call the Kids Help Phone free of charge at 1-800-668-6868 or text CONNECT to 686868. You don't have to tell them your name.

This page contains content pertaining to different types of child abuse, and may trigger an anxiety response, especially in those who have a history of trauma. If you feel triggered, please know that there are resources to help you. Find a list of crisis support links and help lines on the Government of Canada's Mental Health Support webpage.

If you or a child you know is being abused, this information is for you. The COVID-19 crisis means that many of us are now spending a lot of time at home. Unfortunately for some young people, the additional stress, tension and worry linked to the pandemic can make home an unsafe place to be.

If you experience abuse or see it happening in your family, you might feel scared, embarrassed or confused. If you suspect a child you know is being abused, you might wonder what you can do. You should know that help is available and you are not alone!

There are different kinds of abuse

Abuse is harm that can be physical, sexual or emotional. Neglect is also a form of abuse.

Physical Abuse

When something is done to harm a child's or an adult's body, it is physical abuse. Some examples of physical abuse include slapping, kicking, hitting and shaking or threatening to do any of these things.

Sexual Abuse

This is when an adult, teenager or older child touches a child sexually or uses a child in a sexual way. Some examples of sexual abuse include when someone touches a child's private parts (areas covered by a bathing suit or underwear), makes a child touch or look at another person's private parts, takes pictures or videos of a child doing these things or tries to get a child to do these things.

Emotional Abuse

Saying mean things to another person to hurt them is a way of bullying, scaring, or putting them down. So is threatening to hurt someone or to do something mean to them, like destroying their toys or other possessions or harming their pets.

Neglect

Physical or emotional neglect happens when a parent or other family member responsible for a child doesn't give that child the basic things they need to keep them safe and healthy, like food and clothing, or doesn't take them to the doctor when they need medical care.

Help is available for young people

If you are in immediate danger or need help right away, call 9-1-1 or your local police emergency number.

You can call the Kids Help Phone free of charge at 1-800-668-6868 or text CONNECT to 686868. You don't have to tell them your name. More information is available here on the Kids Help Phone website.

If you see or experience abuse, tell someone you trust. You can ask the person you trust for help with a safety plan. A sample of a safety plan you could use to plan ahead can be found here. (PDF Version, 68 KB, PDF Help)

The Canadian Red Cross has advice to help deal with abuse, bullying, and cyberbullying.

More information for young people and adults

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Department of Justice Canada's Internet site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is child abuse?

Child abuse is hurting a child. It occurs when a child experiences harm or neglect. Often, the abuser is someone the child knows. It may be a parent, family member, caregiver or family friend.

Most U.S. child abuse laws agree on this definition of child abuse: Any intentional harm or mistreatment of a child under age 18 is abuse and a criminal offense.

Another term for child abuse and neglect is adverse childhood experiences (ACEs). If untreated, these experiences can impact a child's lifelong health and well-being.

What are the types of child abuse?

Child abuse can come in many forms:

Physical: Slapping, pushing, punching, kicking, shaking or burning a child or not allowing a child to eat, drink or use the bathroom.

Emotional: Frequently verbal, involving insults, constant criticism, harsh demands, threats and yelling.

Sexual: Rape, incest, fondling, indecent exposure, using a child in pornography or exposing a child to pornographic material.

Medical: Intentionally trying to make a child sick or not treating a medical condition.

Is child neglect a form of child abuse?

Yes. Child neglect is a form of abuse. Neglect is failing to provide a child with food, shelter, education, medical care and emotional support.

What is incest?

Incest is a sexual act between family members who are too closely related to be legally married. The sex act can be anything from fondling to intercourse. Any sexual act with a child is abuse.

How does sexual abuse affect a child?

Researchers have noted certain characteristics in children who have experienced abuse. Some behaviors may be more noticeable, such as:

Acting out sexually in inappropriate ways.

Chronic belly pain, headaches or other physical complaints.

Return to childish behaviors such as thumb-sucking and bedwetting.

Running away.

Self-destructive behavior, such as cutting and self-harm.

Severe behavioral changes.

Other characteristics may be harder to identify, such as:

How common is child abuse?

Child neglect and child abuse are common. At least 1 in 7 children has experienced neglect in the past year. The actual figure is likely higher. In the United States in 2018, nearly 1,770 children died of abuse and neglect.

Who is more at risk of child abuse and neglect?

Some children are at higher risk of experiencing abuse and neglect. Risk factors include children who:

Live in poverty. Rates of child abuse are five times higher for children in families with low socioeconomic status.

Are younger than 4 years of age.

Have special needs, which increase the burden on caregivers.

What are signs of child abuse?

Signs of child abuse may not be obvious. You may first notice a shift in the child's behavior. Or they may react differently to situations. Any change in a child's behavior or temperament without an obvious trigger can be a sign of abuse.

Other signs of child abuse include:
Physical signs:

Looking unclean or neglected.

Unexplained bruises, welts, sores or skin problems that don't seem to heal.

Untreated medical or dental problems.

Pain in the genital area.

Vaginal bleeding other than a menstrual cycle (period).

Unusual discharge or pain.

Emotional signs:

Fear of one or both parents or caregivers (including babysitters, day care workers, teachers and coaches).

Fear of an activity or place.

Crying often or in situations that seem inappropriate.

Regression (returning to behaviors typical of a younger child).

Behavioral signs:

Acting different from other children, especially if it's a sudden change.

Frequent absences from school.

Being withdrawn.

Bullying peers or younger children or being bullied themselves.

Trouble learning and paying attention.

Avoiding physical contact with adults, peers or older youth.

Overachievement or being overly eager to please.

Unusual sexualized behaviors or comments, especially ones that seem more mature or pornographic.

Who can be an abuser?
Frequently, the abuser is someone the child knows and is close to, including;

Parent or other family member.

Family friend.

Caregiver.

Anyone close to the child (teacher, coach, religious leader).

Peers or older children who have experienced abuse themselves and are re-enacting what happened to them.

Why do people abuse children?

Several situations can result in a person abusing a child:

History of abuse: Parents or other adults who hurt children may have experienced abuse themselves. Experiencing abuse can also lead an adult to look the other way if their child is in an abusive situation. However, not all people who experienced abuse will abuse others. Most survivors of child abuse do not harm children.

Difficulty with caring for children: Some adults hurt children because they don't know how to discipline them. Or they have unrealistic expectations for the child's behavior.

Feelings of anger: Some people who abuse have overwhelming feelings of anger when faced with a problem. They may have problems with family, money, work or relationships. Their frustration and anger can result in abusive actions. In some cases, the person sees the child as the source of the problems, causing them to act out against the child.

Untreated mental health conditions: People who have depression, substance use disorder or personality disorders are at higher risk for abusing children.

If you have abused or neglected a child or witnessed signs of child abuse, seek help from a local mental health agency. Getting help can prevent or reduce the child's long-term trauma.

How does a healthcare provider detect child abuse?

The healthcare provider will carefully evaluate the child, looking for physical and behavioral signs of abuse. County or state authorities may also take part in the investigation.

The diagnosis may involve:

Physical exam.

Lab tests.

X-rays or other tests.

The diagnostic team will also:

Ask about the child's medical and developmental history.

Observe the child's behavior and interactions with parents or caregivers.

Talk to parents or caregivers.

Talk to the child, if possible.

What are the treatments for a child who has been abused?

Children may need immediate medical treatment if they have physical injuries, seem dazed or lose consciousness. Follow your healthcare provider's recommendations for follow-up visits or visits to specialists as needed.

Children who experience abuse most likely need ongoing behavioral health care. Counseling and therapy can help prevent future abuse and reduce long-term damage. During psychotherapy sessions, a mental health professional helps the child learn to trust and boost their self-esteem. They also teach children about healthy relationships and conflict management strategies.

Therapy is beneficial for parents, too. It can help cope with the situation, uncover the roots of abuse and learn healthy parenting strategies.

How can I stop child abuse?

Take action if you notice signs of child abuse or if abuse is happening in your house.

Talk to the child: Talk to the child if you notice a change in their behavior or if they start reacting in worrisome new ways. Having open, friendly conversations (within healthy boundaries) allows the child to trust you and feel comfortable telling you if they don't feel safe. Let children know it's OK to tell you something even if it might upset someone.

Seek help: Don't let fear or embarrassment prevent you from seeking help. When you contact authorities to report abuse, your name is not released to the family or person involved. If you suspect that a child is experiencing abuse, call or contact:

911 if the child is in immediate danger.

Your local child protective agency, police or hospital.

The Child Help National Child Abuse hotline (1-800-422-4453), open 24/7.

Pediatrician, who can also help direct you in cases of child abuse.

Religious or spiritual advisor, who can provide counseling and support.

You should also:

Keep the child away from the abuser until authorities are notified.

Supervise any future contact with the person.

Never threaten the suspected abuser or take the law into your own hands.

If you think you have abused a child or are at risk for committing abuse:

Reach out to a friend, family member and health professional.

Make sure the child is safe and away from you during this time.

Seek a counselor who can help you understand and work through your feelings.

What is the outlook for children who have been abused?

Children who experience abuse may have:

Immediate injuries, including cuts, bruises and broken bones.

Frequent injuries.

Learning problems.

Emotional, psychological and behavioral problems, including depression.

Anxiety and difficulty with social skills.

Fear of certain adults or places.

Child abuse can leave a lasting impact on children if left untreated. Adult survivors of child abuse are more likely to have social and emotional problems. They may:

Abuse others or accept abuse.

Attempt suicide.

Care for others at the expense of their own well-being.

Have sexual issues, including engaging in risky sexual behavior, becoming sexually promiscuous or avoiding sex entirely.

Have trouble trusting people.

Adult survivors may also have medical and behavioral problems such as:

Chronic pain, daily headaches, fibromyalgia and abdominal pain.

Depression.

Low self-esteem.

Substance use order or alcohol use disorder.

Toxic stress, which can affect brain development and increase the risk for PTSD and learning, attention and memory problems.

How can I improve the long-term health of a child who has experienced abuse?

Seek out a mental health professional. Therapy can help the child process what happened to them, learn to build healthy relationships and reduce the lasting effects of the abuse. Managing the emotional impact of abuse can improve children's long-term physical health, too.

How do I help a child who confided about abuse?

If a child confides about abuse, take the child seriously. Don't brush it off or assume they're being dramatic or making things up. To keep the child safe:

Encourage open discussion. Listen as the child talks, and allow them to explain what happened in their words. Comfort them and remind them you're available to talk or listen.

Remind the child that it is not their fault. They are not responsible for the abuse.

Ensure the child stays safe by separating the child from the abuser.

Contact a healthcare provider who can guide you on next steps.

Get additional support, such as counseling, therapy or support groups.

Be patient. Children recover at different rates. Support the child during the recovery process.

What should I ask my child's doctor?

If your child has experienced abuse, talk to your child's pediatrician. Ask:

What physical medical care does my child need now?

What type of therapy will help my child?

Will family therapy be beneficial to us?

How can I help my child recover?

Is there anything we should avoid doing or saying?

How else can I keep my child safe?

A note from Cleveland Clinic
Unfortunately, child abuse is common. Children who experience abuse are at risk for health problems both now and in the future, but there is hope for recovery. Learn to recognize the signs of child abuse, such as a child acting strangely or differently. If you suspect abuse, keep the child safe from the abuser and seek professional help. Physical and mental health care can help reduce the lasting effects of child abuse. Talk to your healthcare provider (or your child's) about ways to stop and prevent child abuse.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Child Abuse: Definition, Signs, Child Neglect, Emotional Abuse

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Child abuse is hurting a child. It occurs when a child experiences harm or neglect. Often, the abuser is someone the child knows. It may be a parent, family member, caregiver or family friend. Most U.S. child abuse laws agree on this definition of child abuse: Any intentional harm or mistreatment of a child under age 18 is abuse and a criminal offense.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Movement for Children’s rights and to bring positive changes in the society through her hard work and determination with the help of UNICEF.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What we heard: The challenges - Final report on the review of Canada’s criminal justice system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What we heard: The challenges - Final report on the review of Canada’s criminal justice system

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ignorance is Bliss: Cultural genocide in China

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ky’mani Brown discusses her research and concerns about cultural genocide in China, concluding that her relatively powerless position leaves her wishing she was ignorant on the issue. This talk explores human rights issues as they intersect with the economic and international affairs, while also leading the listener to wonder what their role is in protecting the rights of others.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kim Jong Un: 10 years of missiles, murder and economic misery | Kim Jong Un News | Al Jazeera

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We use cookies and other tracking technologies to deliver and personalize content and ads, enable features, measure site performance, and enable social media sharing. You can choose to customize your preferences.Learn more about our Cookie Policy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
TED-Ed celebrates the ideas of teachers and students around the world. Discover hundreds of animated lessons, create customized lessons, and share your big ideas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
North Korea decries ‘dictatorship’ in South in wake of martial law attempt

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
State media in neighbouring country that has been ruled by a dictatorial dynasty since 1948 breaks silence to criticise President Yoon’s ‘gangster nation’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When an Armenian resistance movement began to form in the 19th century, Sultan Abdul Hamid II took decisive action. He led the Hamidian Massacres— a relentless campaign of violence that killed over 150,000 Armenians. These massacres were the culmination of centuries of oppression, yet they were only the beginning of an even greater tragedy. Ümit Kurt uncovers the history of the Armenian Genocide. [Directed by Héloïse Dorsan-Rachet, narrated by Adrian Dannatt, music by Dan Yessian, Yessian Music].

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Provision

2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

freedom of conscience and religion.

Similar provisions

Purpose

The purpose of section 2(a) is to prevent interference with profoundly held personal beliefs that govern one's perception of oneself, humankind, nature, and, in some cases, a higher or different order of being (R. v. Edwards Books and Art Ltd., [1986] 2 S.C.R. 713 at page 759; R. v. Big M Drug Mart Ltd., [1985] 1 S.C.R. 295 at page 346; Syndicat Northcrest v. Amselem, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 551 at paragraph 41; Alberta v. Hutterian Brethren of Wilson Colony, [2009] 2 S.C.R. 567 at paragraph 32).

Analysis

1. Freedom of religion

General

Freedom of religion has been defined as "the right to entertain such religious beliefs as a person chooses, the right to declare religious beliefs openly and without fear of hindrance or reprisal, and the right to manifest religious belief by worship and practise or by teaching and dissemination" ( Big M, supra at page 336; Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825 at paragraph 72; Amselem, supra at paragraph 40; Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, [2004] 3 S.C.R. 698 at paragraph 57; Multani v. Commission scolaire Marguerite‑Bourgeoys, [2006] 1 S.C.R. 256 at paragraph 32; Bruker v. Marcovitz, [2007] 3 S.C.R. 607 at paragraph 71; Ktunaxa Nation v. British Columbia (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations), [2017] 2 S.C.R. 386 at paragraph 63). The term "religion" has not been specifically defined, although the Supreme Court has stated that beliefs or practices rooted in secularism are not protected by the guarantee of freedom of religion and, further, that "religion" typically involves: a particular and comprehensive system of faith and worship; a belief in a divine, superhuman or controlling power; and/or a personal conviction or belief that fosters a connection with the divine or with the subject or object of that spiritual faith ( Amselem, supra at paragraph 39). Note, however, that the Court has also stated that the rights of atheists, agnostics, skeptics and the unconcerned are equally protected by section 2(a) ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 90; Mouvement laïque québecois v. Saguenay (City), [2015] 2 S.C.R. 3 at paragraph 70).

The Supreme Court has interpreted section 2(a) broadly with a stated preference for leaving competing state interests, including competing rights, to be reconciled under section 1, or through the proportionality analysis in the case of judicial review of administrative decisions, rather than formulating internal limits to the scope of freedom of religion ( Ross, supra at paragraph 73; see also Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, supra at paragraph 53; and Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, [2013] 1 S.C.R. 467 at paragraph 154). Section 1 is considered a more flexible tool for balancing competing rights (very often equality rights of other individuals) ( B. (R.) v. Children's Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto, [1995] 1 S.C.R. 315 at pages 383-384; see also Multani, supra at paragraphs 26-30). In spite of the guarantee's broad scope, however, the Court has also set certain limits, stating that "the freedom to hold beliefs is broader than the freedom to act on them" ( Trinity Western University v. British Columbia College of Teachers, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 772 at paragraph 36; B.(R.) supra at paragraphs 107 and 226; see also Whatcott, supra at para. 154).

The Supreme Court has stated on many occasions that freedom of religion can be limited where it interferes with the fundamental rights of others ( Ross, supra at paragraph 72; B.(R.), supra at page 385; Big M, supra at page 337; Amselem, supra at paragraph 62). When individual rights come into conflict, the conflict ought to be resolved through the proper delineation of the rights and values involved ( Trinity Western v. British Columbia College of Teachers, supra at paragraphs 29-31; Reference re Same-Sex Marriage, supra at paragraphs 50 and 52; B.(R), supra at paragraph 226).

In Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, [2018] 2 S.C.R. 293, and its companion case Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada, [2018] 2 S.C.R. 453, the Supreme Court chose to reconcile the competing religious freedom of evangelical community members of TWU with the equality rights of LGBTQ persons through the proportionality analysis at the second stage of the Doré/Loyola framework for the judicial review of administrative decisions that engage Charter rights. The majority found that the impact on the religious freedom of TWU community members was of "minor significance" and that the law societies' decisions represented a proportionate balance with the significant statutory objectives of ensuring LGBTQ equality and public confidence in the legal profession.

The scope of section 2(a) is not, however, without limits. In Ktunaxa, supra, at paragraphs 71-72, a majority of the Supreme Court held that an Indigenous spiritual freedom claim to the protection of a sacred mountain valley site from a proposed ski resort development did not fall within the scope of section 2(a), which does not protect the object of beliefs or the spiritual focal point of worship and the subjective meaning derived from them.

Freedom of religion comprises both an individual aspect and a collective aspect ( Loyola High School v. Quebec (Attorney General), [2015] 1 S.C.R. 613; Ktunaxa, supra at paragraph 74; Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 182, per LeBel J). The Supreme Court has noted that religion is about both religious beliefs and "religious relationships" (Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, supra at para. 64). Recognizing the linkages between religious belief and its manifestation through "communal institutions and traditions", the Court has found that "measures that undermine the character of lawful religious institutions and disrupt the vitality of religious communities represent a profound interference with religious freedom" ( Loyola High School, supra at paragraph 67; see also Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, supra at paragraphs 64 and 99). In Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University, supra, a majority of the Court found that the refusal of the regulatory bodies to accredit a new law school governed by a mandatory covenant, which precluded sexual relations outside marriage between a man and a woman, engaged s. 2(a) of the Charter by limiting the ability of members of the TWU community to enhance their spiritual development through studying law in an environment defined by their religious beliefs. In collective-type claims, freedom of religion may encompass or intersect with other rights, such as freedom of expression, freedom of association and equality (at paragraphs 76-78; 122; 316).

Analytical framework

An infringement of section 2( a) of the Charter will be made out where:

1. the claimant sincerely believes in a belief or practice that has a nexus with religion; and

2. the impugned measure interferes with the claimant's ability to act in accordance with his or her religious beliefs in a manner that is more than trivial or insubstantial.

(i) Nature of the belief or practice

Under the first step, as stated above, freedom of religion will only be triggered where the claimant shows that he or she has a sincere practice or belief that has a nexus with religion, "which calls for a particular line of conduct, either by being objectively or subjectively obligatory or customary, or by, in general, subjectively engendering a personal connection with the divine or with the subject or object of an individual's spiritual faith" ( Amselem, supra at paragraph 56).

Sincerity of belief is a question of fact. To establish sincerity, an individual must show that he or she sincerely believes that a certain belief or practice is required by his or her religion. The religious belief must be asserted in good faith and must not be fictitious, capricious or an artifice. In assessing the sincerity of the belief, a court will take into account, inter alia, the credibility of the testimony of the person asserting the particular belief and the consistency of the belief with his or her other current religious practices ( Multani, supra at paragraph 35; Amselem, supra at paragraphs 52-53). It is the sincerity of the belief at the time of the interference, not its strength or absolute consistency over time, that is relevant at this stage of the analysis ( R. v. N.S., [2012] 3 S.C.R. 726 at paragraph 13).

Assuming the sincerity of an asserted religious belief, it is not then open to the court to question its validity. It is sufficient to trigger constitutional scrutiny if the effect of the impugned act or provision interferes with an individual's religious activities or convictions ( Ross, supra at paragraph 71; R. v. Jones, [1986] 2 S.C.R. 284 at page 295).

In Ktunaxa, supra at paragraphs 71-72, a majority of the Supreme Court declined to extend the scope of section 2(a) to include the protection of the object of beliefs or the spiritual focus of worship, and the subjective meaning derived from them, on the basis that it would put the contents and merits of deeply held personal beliefs under judicial scrutiny, contrary to Amselem, supra.

(ii) Nature of the interference

However, the Constitution shelters individuals and groups only to the extent that religious beliefs or conduct might reasonably or actually be threatened. Claimants must provide objective proof of interference, not just cite subjective belief of interference ( S.L., supra at paragraphs 2 and 24). Not every effect of legislation on religious beliefs or practices is offensive to the guarantee of freedom of religion. Section 2(a) does not require the legislature to refrain from imposing any burdens on the practice of religion. Legislative or administrative action which has a trivial or insubstantial effect on religion is not a breach of freedom of religion, yet there is no requirement to demonstrate actual harm, only that the freedom is infringed ( Ross, supra at page 870; Edwards Books, supra at page 759; Little, supra at paragraph 17). Trivial or insubstantial interference has been described as interference that does not threaten actual religious beliefs or conduct ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 32). The oath to the Queen, as a requirement of becoming a Canadian citizen, has been found to be secular and thus not to constitute a more than trivial or insubstantial interference with the sincerely held religious beliefs of non-Anglicans ( McAteer v. Canada (Attorney General), 2014 ONCA 578, leave to appeal dismissed, [2014] S.C.C.A. No. 444).

It is unclear whether the effect of any breach of the state's duty of religious neutrality could be considered trivial or insubstantial so as not to unjustifiably limit freedom of religion (see Saguenay, supra).

The state is normally under no duty under section 2(a) to take affirmative action to eliminate the natural costs of religious practices or to otherwise provide positive assistance such as public funding. The Charter guarantees freedom of religion but does not indemnify practitioners against all costs incidental to the practice of religion ( Edwards Books, supra at paragraphs 97 and 114; Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 95). Accommodation or differential treatment may be necessary, nonetheless, to avoid indirect coercion arising from state action ( Edwards Books, supra). Note, also, that several Supreme Court justices have suggested that, in exceptional circumstances, positive government action may be required to make the right to freedom of religion meaningful, according to the test set out in Dunmore v. Ontario (Attorney General), [2001] 3 S.C.R. 1016 (see the dissenting judgment in Congrégation des témoins de Jéhovah de St-Jérôme-Lafontaine v. Lafontaine (Village), [2004] 2 S.C.R. 650 at paragraphs 73-79).

Selected issues in respect of freedom of religion

(i) Freedom from conformity to religious dogma

Freedom from conformity to religious dogma (freedom to express and manifest religious non-belief and the freedom to refuse to participate in religious practice) is not necessarily impaired by legislation with a secular inspiration which requires conduct consistent with the tenets of a religion. Such legislation might, however, limit the freedom of conscience and religion of persons whose conduct is governed by an intention to express or manifest their non-conformity with religious doctrine ( Edwards Books, supra at paragraph 101).

Although section 2(a) of the Charter is not infringed merely because education may be consistent with the religious beliefs held by a majority of Canadians, teaching students Christian doctrine as if it were the exclusive means through which to develop moral thinking and behaviour amounts to religious coercion in the classroom ( Canadian Civil Liberties Assn. v. Ontario (1990), 71 O.R. (2d) 341 (C.A.) at paragraph 57; Zylberberg et al. v. Sudbury Board of Education (1988), 52 D.L.R. (4th) 577 (Ont. C.A.)). Also the same time, requiring a religious school to teach its own religion from a neutral perspective has been found to seriously impair the religious freedom of the school's community members ( Loyola, supra).

Government may not coerce individuals into affirming a specific religious belief nor to manifest a specific religious practice for a sectarian purpose. Government may not compel individuals to perform or abstain from performing otherwise harmless acts because of the religious significance of those acts to others ( Big M, supra at pages 347, 350). But the right not to believe is not infringed by a criminal offence that is rooted in a moral principle developed within a religious tradition ( Edwards Books, supra at pages 760-761). A person's belief in the religious aspect of a societal institution does not free that person from an obligation to comply with the civil aspect ( Jones, supra at page 313).

A requirement to apply to a school board for a religious exemption from mandatory school attendance in order to attend a private religious school or to receive instruction at home does not offend section 2(a); it accommodates it ( Jones, supra at page 312). Similar reasoning applies to a law allowing businesses to close on days other than Sunday for religious reasons ( Edwards Books, supra at pages 779-780).

Permitting exemptions to a religious requirement can still, however, result in an infringement of section 2(a) by in effect compelling a religious statement by those seeking an exemption or due to peer pressure which might militate against seeking an exemption ( Saguenay, supra at paragraphs 120-125).

(ii) Secularism and state neutrality

The meaning of secularism has also been addressed by the Supreme Court. According to the Court, the concept of secularism rules out any attempt to use the religious views of one part of the community to exclude from consideration the values of other members of the community. A requirement of secularism implies equal recognition and respect to all members of a community. Religious views that deny equal recognition and respect to the members of a minority group cannot be used to exclude the concerns of the minority group (Chamberlain v. Surrey School District No. 36, [2002] 4 S.C.R. 710 at paragraph 19).

Secularism is closely linked to the notion of "state neutrality" in respect of religion, which the Supreme Court has articulated as follows:

"... following a realistic and non-absolutist approach, state neutrality is assured when the state neither favours nor hinders any particular religious belief, that is, when it shows respect for all postures towards religion, including that of having no religious beliefs whatsoever, while taking into account the competing constitutional rights of the individuals affected." ( S.L. v. Commission scolaire des Chênes, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 235 at paragraph 32; see also Loyola, supra at paragraphs 43-45).

A breach of a duty of state neutrality must be established by proving that the state is professing, adopting or favouring one belief to the exclusion of all others and that the exclusion has resulted in interference with the complainant's freedom of conscience or religion ( Saguenay, supra at paragraph 83). While the state cannot favour one religious view at the expense of others, the duty of neutrality does not require it entirely to abstain from celebrating and preserving its religious heritage ( Saguenay, supra at paragraphs 87 and 116).

Such neutrality is consistent with promoting diversity in a multicultural society as enshrined in section 27 of the Charter and with a democratic imperative that requires the state to encourage everyone to participate freely in public life regardless of their beliefs ( Saguenay, supra at paragraph 74). The reference to the supremacy of God in the preamble of the Charter cannot be relied on to reduce the scope of freedom of religion and authorize the state to consciously profess a theistic faith ( Saguenay, supra at paragraphs 147-48).

Secularism in the Canadian context has not been held to mean that religion has no place in the public sphere. For example, in R. v. N.S., the majority of the Supreme Court concluded that a secular response that requires individuals to "park their religion at the courtroom door" ( e.g. to always remove the full niqab face veil before testifying in criminal proceedings) is inconsistent with Canadian jurisprudence and "our tradition of requiring state institutions and actors to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs insofar as possible" and risks limiting freedom of religion where no limit can be justified ( R. v. N.S., supra at paragraphs 2, 31, 50-56; see also Chamberlain, supra at paragraph 19).

State compliance with its duty of neutrality does not entail a reconciliation of rights. The state does not have a freedom to believe or to manifest belief. However, the Court has stated that the same restrictions do not apply to the exercise by state officials of their own freedom of conscience and religion when they are not acting in an official capacity ( Saguenay, supra at paragraph 119).

(iii) Religious communications

Since there is no prima facie privilege for religious communications at common law, a case-by-case application of the Wigmore criteria will allow courts to determine whether an individual's freedom of religion will be imperilled by the admission of evidence, and section 2(a) and section 27 of the Charter require a non-denominational approach in this regard ( R. v. Gruenke, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 263 at pages 289-291).

(iv) Best interests of the child

Parents have the right to rear their children according to their religious beliefs, including choosing religious education and choosing medical and other treatments ( B.(R.), supra at paragraph 105; P.(D.) v. S.(C.), [1993] 4 S.C.R. 141; Jones, supra at page 296). However, such activities can and must be restricted when they are against the child's best interests ( B.(R)., supra at page 383). Furthemore, the exercise of discretionary powers in a custody application that are based solely on the best interests of the child can prevent the imposition of religious views of the non-custodial parent on the child ( Young v. Young, [1993] 4 S.C.R. 3 at pages 94 and 122; P.(D.) v. S.(C.), supra at page 182).

When the "best interests of the child" standard, as provided in child protection legislation, is applied in a way that takes into increasingly serious account the young person's views in accordance with their maturity in a given medical treatment case (and allows the young person to lead evidence showing mature medical decisional capacity), the legislative scheme is neither arbitrary, discriminatory, nor violative of religious freedom ( A.C. v. Manitoba (Director of Child and Family Services), [2009] 2 S.C.R. 181 at paragraphs 98 and 115).

With respect to education, while parents have the right to pass on their religious beliefs to their children, "...the early exposure of children to realities that differ from those in their immediate family environment is a fact of life in society. The suggestion that exposing children to a variety of religious facts in itself infringes their religious freedom or that of their parents amounts to a rejection of the multicultural reality of Canadian society and ignores [in this case] the Quebec government's obligations with regard to public education." ( S.L., supra at paragraph 40; see also Loyola, supra at paragraph 71).

(v) Income taxes

The non-filing of annual returns, like the non-payment of taxes, does not qualify as a religious practice nor has it become the tenet of any religious faith. Furthermore, the filing of annual income tax returns, like the payment of taxes, cannot reasonably be regarded as an expression of support for a particular government expenditure or policy so as to offend a claimant's Charter right to freedom of religion and conscience ( Little, supra at paragraphs 10 and 17).

2. Freedom of conscience

While the Supreme Court has not given much consideration to freedom of conscience, it has noted that this aspect of section 2(a) includes the right not to have a religious basis for one's conduct ( Edward Books, supra at paragraph 99). In the concurring judgment of Wilson J. in R. v. Morgentaler, [1988] 1 S.C.R. 30 at page 37, freedom of conscience was distinguished from freedom of religion as follows:

""Freedom of conscience and religion" should be broadly construed to extend to conscientiously-held beliefs, whether grounded in religion or in a secular morality and the terms "conscience" and "religion" should not be treated as tautologous if capable of independent, although related, meaning..."

The oath to the Queen of Canada (as part of becoming a Canadian citizen) has been found not to limit the freedom of conscience of persons who say they are morally and ethically opposed to what the Queen stands for; it is not an oath to the Queen as an individual but to our form of government of which the Queen is a symbol ( McAteer, supra at paragraphs 117-120).

3. Section 93 denominational school rights and privileges

The denominational, dissentient and separate school rights or privileges protected under section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867 are the product of an historical compromise crucial to Confederation and form a comprehensive code immune from Charter review that cannot be enlarged through the operation of section 2(a) ( Adler v. Ontario, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 609 at paragraph 35; Reference Re Bill 30, An Act to amend the Education Act (Ont.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 1148; Ontario Home Builders' Association v. York Region Board of Education, [1996] 2 S.C.R. 929 at paragraph 77). See also the discussion in "Charterpedia, section 29".

A secular public school system does not limit section 2(a), but any government funding of religious schools beyond that required by section 93 would have to be extended equally among religions ( Adler, supra at paragraph 49).

Section 1 considerations particular to this section

Freedom of religion is not unlimited, "...and is restricted by the right of others to hold and to manifest beliefs and opinions of their own, and to be free from injury from the exercise of the freedom of religion of others. Freedom of religion is subject to such limitations as are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals and the fundamental rights and freedoms of others" ( Ross, supra at paragraph 72; B.(R.),supra) at page 385; Big M, supra at page 337; Amselem, supra at paragraph 62).

A section 1 justification is unavailable where the purpose of the legislation is to infringe freedom of religion ( Big M, supra at page 353; Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 92).

While religious freedom has both individual and collective aspects, community impact does not transform an individual claim into the assertion of a group right. The broader impact of an infringement on a religious community is relevant at the proportionality stage of a section 1 analysis ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 31).

The reasonable accommodation analysis undertaken when applying human rights legislation and the proportionality analysis under section 1 of the Charter are conceptually distinct ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraphs 66-71; see also the minority reasons in Multani, supra at paragraphs 129-135). Where the validity of a law of general application is at stake, the proper approach is a section 1 Charter analysis based on the Oakes test. Where a government action or administrative practice is challenged, the case law on the duty to accommodate may be helpful "to explain the burden resulting from the minimal impairment test with respect to a particular individual" [emphasis in original] ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 67).

Section 2(a) cases will often fall to be decided at the final balancing stage of the proportionality analysis since freedom of religion cases often present an "all or nothing" dilemma. Compromising religious beliefs is something adherents may justifiably be unwilling to do, and governments may find it difficult to tailor laws to the myriad ways in which they may trench on different people's religious beliefs and practices ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 61).

When judging the seriousness of the limit in a particular case, while the perspective of the religious or conscientious claimant is important, this perspective must be considered in the context of a multicultural, multi-religious society where the duty of state authorities to legislate for the general good inevitably produces conflicts with individual beliefs ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraph 90).

Where the incidental effects of a law passed for the general good on a particular religious practice are so great that they effectively deprive the adherent of a meaningful choice, the impact of the limit on the right will be very serious. In contrast, where a limit exacts a cost but leaves the adherent with a meaningful choice about the religious practice, the impact on the right will be less serious ( Hutterian Brethren, supra at paragraphs 94-5).

Section 2(a) cases often involve the review of discretionary administrative decisions rather than direct challenges to laws (see for example, Trinity Western University v. Law Society of British Columbia, supra; Ktunaxa, supra; Loyola, supra). Such cases will be examined in accordance with the framework set out in Doré v. Barreau du Québec, [2012] 1 S.C.R. 392, and Loyola, supra, rather than pursuant to the Oakes test. A reviewing court will consider whether the administrative decision engages Charter protections and, if so, whether it reflects a proportionate balancing of the Charter protections at play with the relevant statutory mandate (for more information on this framework, see "Charterpedia, Section 1").

The content is current up until 2022-07-31.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Department of Justice Canada's Internet site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sexual Assault Statistics - Rape Victims Support Network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Image

Photograph by Frans Lanting

Biodiversity is a term used to describe the enormous variety of life on Earth. It can be used more specifically to refer to all of the species in one region or ecosystem. Biodiversity refers to every living thing, including plants, bacteria, animals, and humans. Scientists have estimated that there are around 8.7 million species of plants and animals in existence. However, only around 1.2 million species have been identified and described so far, most of which are insects. This means that millions of other organisms remain a complete mystery.

Over generations, all of the species that are currently alive today have evolved unique traits that make them distinct from other species. These differences are what scientists use to tell one species from another. Organisms that have evolved to be so different from one another that they can no longer reproduce with each other are considered different species. All organisms that can reproduce with each other fall into one species.

Scientists are interested in how much biodiversity there is on a global scale, given that there is still so much biodiversity to discover. They also study how many species exist in single ecosystems, such as a forest, grassland, tundra, or lake. A single grassland can contain a wide range of species, from beetles to snakes to antelopes. Ecosystems that host the most biodiversity tend to have ideal environmental conditions for plant growth, like the warm and wet climate of tropical regions. Ecosystems can also contain species too small to see with the naked eye. Looking at samples of soil or water through a microscope reveals a whole world of bacteria and other tiny organisms.

Some areas in the world, such as areas of Mexico, South Africa, Brazil, the southwestern United States, and Madagascar, have more biodiversity than others. Areas with extremely high levels of biodiversity are called hotspots. Endemic species-species that are only found in one particular location-are also found in hotspots.

All of the Earth's species work together to survive and maintain their ecosystems. For example, the grass in pastures feeds cattle. Cattle then produce manure that returns nutrients to the soil, which helps to grow more grass. This manure can also be used to fertilize cropland. Many species provide important benefits to humans, including food, clothing, and medicine.

Much of the Earth's biodiversity, however, is in jeopardy due to human consumption and other activities that disturb and even destroy ecosystems. Pollution, climate change, and population growth are all threats to biodiversity. These threats have caused an unprecedented rise in the rate of species extinction. Some scientists estimate that half of all species on Earth will be wiped out within the next century. Conservation efforts are necessary to preserve biodiversity and protect endangered species and their habitats.

National Geographic Society

March 11, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biodiversity refers to the variety of living species on Earth, including plants, animals, bacteria, and fungi. While Earth's biodiversity is so rich that many species have yet to be discovered, many species are being threatened with extinction due to human activities, putting the Earth's magnificent biodiversity at risk.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The problem of education inequality | CNBC Reports

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As a child growing up in North Korea, Hyeonseo Lee thought her country was “the best on the planet.” It wasn’t until the famine of the 90s that she began to wonder. She escaped the country at 14, to begin a life in hiding, as a refugee in China. Hers is a harrowing, personal tale of survival and hope -- and a powerful reminder of those who face constant danger, even when the border is far behind.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change and extreme heat waves in Canada

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Climate change is causing more frequent and extreme heat waves. These heat waves are threatening the safety, well-being, and prosperity of…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In May, Canadians were shocked at the discovery of the remains of 215 children at the site of a former school in British Columbia. The bodies belonged to Indigenous children, some believed to be as young as three years old, who went through Canada's state-sponsored "residential school" system. The schools, scattered across the country, were aimed at eradicating the culture and languages of the country's Indigenous populations.

The findings have brought the world's renewed attention to this shameful chapter of Canadian history, left deep wounds in hundreds of communities and sparked fresh demands for justice aimed at the Canadian government and the churches that ran the schools for decades.

In 2015, the truth and reconciliation commission, which collected thousands of hours of testimony from survivors, determined that the residential school systems had amounted to a "cultural genocide" of Indigenous people. The federal government formally apologised for the schools in 2008, but the recent discoveries of graves have prompted calls for an independent investigation, including the possibility of criminal charges against the government and the Catholic church.

The prime minister, Justin Trudeau, has pledged to take "concrete action" to help Indigenous communities in their searches, but the costs are expected to far exceed money offered by the government. A previous request of $1.5m in funding to search for the graves was denied by the federal government in 2009. Meanwhile, as the searches continue, the number of unmarked graves - and those who died attending the schools - is only expected to rise.
Sources and methodology
Indian residential schools dataset: National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation at the University of Manitoba
Native land claims dataset: native-land.ca
Historical Treaties dataset: canada.ca
St Eugene mission pictures: Indian Residential School History & Dialogue Centre
Journey animations are based on survivors' testimonies; the Guardian reconstructed the journeys using Google Maps. Distances provided are approximate
This article was amended on 8 September 2021. The earlier version erroneously included the Peace and Friendship Treaties and the Douglas Treaties among the Numbered Treaties.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Cultural genocide': the shameful history of Canada's residential schools - mapped

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Recent discoveries of unmarked graves have shed new light on the country's troubled colonial legacy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion in the Workplace

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is meant by diversity, equity, and inclusion? Diversity, equity, and inclusion promote the fair treatment and full participation of all people, especially populations that have historically been underrepresented or subject to discrimination because of their background, identity, disability, or other characteristics or circumstances.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your online portal to data, analysis, and commentary on income and wealth inequality.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"I didn't say 'former president,' I said 'president,' and I have rights according to the Constitution, among them immunity from prosecution," he growled from the docket. The outburst underscored the boundless egotism and self-delusion of a man who fostered such a fierce personality cult during the decades that he ran the Middle Eastern nation that joking about him or criticizing him in public could bring a death sentence.

If a man's life can be boiled down to one physical mark, Mr. Hussein's right wrist was tattooed with a line of three dark blue dots, commonly given to children in rural, tribal areas. Some urbanized Iraqis removed or at least bleached theirs, but Mr. Hussein's former confidants told The Atlantic Monthly that he never disguised his.

Ultimately, underneath all the socialist oratory, underneath the Koranic references, the tailored suits and the invocations of Iraq's glorious history, Mr. Hussein held onto the ethos of a village peasant who believed that the strongman was everything. He was trying to be a tribal leader on a grand scale. His rule was paramount, and sustaining it was his main goal behind all the talk of developing Iraq by harnessing its considerable wealth and manpower.

Mosques, airports, neighborhoods and entire cities were named after him. A military arch erected in Baghdad in 1989 was modeled on his forearms and then enlarged 40 times to hold two giant crossed swords. In school, pupils learned songs with lyrics like "Saddam, oh Saddam, you carry the nation's dawn in your eyes."

The entertainment at public events often consisted of outpourings of praise for Mr. Hussein. At the January 2003 inauguration of a recreational lake in Baghdad, poets spouted spontaneous verse and the official translators struggled to keep up with lines like, "We will stimulate ourselves by saying your name, Saddam Hussein, when we say Saddam Hussein, we stimulate ourselves."

While Mr. Hussein was in power, his statue guarded the entrance to every village, his portrait watched over each government office and he peered down from at least one wall in every home. His picture was so widespread that a joke quietly circulating among his detractors in 1988 put the country's population at 34 million - 17 million people and 17 million portraits of Saddam.
Battles and Bloodshed
Throughout his rule, he unsettled the ranks of the Baath Party with bloody purges and packed his jails with political prisoners to defuse real or imagined plots. In one of his most brutal acts, he rained poison gas on the northern Kurdish village of Halabja in 1988, killing an estimated 5,000 of his own citizens suspected of being disloyal and wounding 10,000 more.

Even at the end, he showed no remorse. When four Iraqi politicians visited him after his capture in December 2003, they asked about his more brutal acts. He called the Halabja attack Iran's handiwork; he said that Kuwait was rightfully part of Iraq and that the mass graves were filled with thieves who fled the battlefields, according to Adnan Pachachi, a former Iraqi foreign minister. Mr. Hussein declared that he had been "just but firm" because Iraqis needed a tough ruler, Mr. Pachachi said.

It was a favorite theme, one even espoused in a novel attributed to Mr. Hussein called "Zabibah and the King."

At one point, the king asks the comely Zabibah whether the people needed strict measures from their leader. "Yes, Your Majesty," Zabibah replies. "The people need strict measures so that they can feel protected by this strictness."

Aside from his secret police, he held power by filling the government's upper ranks with members of his extended clan. Their Corleone-like feuds became the stuff of gory public soap operas. Mr. Hussein once sentenced his elder son, Uday, to be executed after he beat Mr. Hussein's food taster to death in front of scores of horrified party guests, but later rescinded the order. The husbands of his two eldest daughters, whom he had promoted to important military positions, were gunned down after they defected and then inexplicably returned to Iraq.

Continual wars sapped Iraq's wealth and decimated its people. In 1980, Mr. Hussein dragged his country into a disastrous attempt to overthrow the new Islamic government in neighboring Iran. By the time the war ended in stalemate in 1988, more than 200,000 Iraqis were dead and hundreds of thousands more wounded. Iran suffered a similar toll. Iraq's staggering war debt, pegged around $70 billion, soon had wealthy Arab neighbors demanding repayment. Enraged, he invaded Kuwait in August 1990, only to be expelled by an American-led coalition in the Persian Gulf war seven months later.

Yet in the language of his Orwellian government, Mr. Hussein never suffered a setback. After the gulf war ended with the deaths of an estimated 150,000 Iraqis, he called "the Mother of All Battles" his biggest victory and maintained that Iraq had actually repulsed an American attack.

"Iraq has punched a hole in the myth of American superiority and rubbed the nose of the United States in the dust," Mr. Hussein said.

His defeat in Kuwait, followed by more than a decade of tense confrontations with the West over his suspected weapons programs, ultimately led to his overthrow. The extended bloodbath that followed the invasion, with the monthly death toll of Iraqi civilians estimated roughly at 3,000 by the end of 2006, made some nostalgic for even the oppressive days of Mr. Hussein, when public security was not an issue. His repressive ways were credited with keeping the fractious population of 26 million - including 20 percent Sunni Muslims, who dominated; 55 percent Shiite Muslims; 20 percent Kurds plus several tiny minorities including Christians - from shattering along ethnic lines.
The Pathway to Politics
Saddam Hussein was born on April 28, 1937, in a mud hut on stilts near the banks of the Tigris River near the village of Tikrit, 100 miles northwest of Baghdad. He was raised by a clan of landless peasants, his father apparently deserting his mother before his birth. (Government accounts said the father died.)

"His birth was not a joyful occasion, and no roses or aromatic plants bedecked his cradle," his official biographer, Amir Iskander, wrote in "Saddam Hussein, the Fighter, the Thinker and the Man," published in 1981.

Mr. Hussein told his biographer that he did not miss his father growing up in an extended clan. But persistent stories suggest that Mr. Hussein's stepfather delighted in humiliating the boy and forced him to tend sheep. Eventually, he ran away to live with relatives who would let him go to school.

Mr. Hussein's first role in the rough world of Iraqi politics came in 1959, at age 22, when the Baath Party assigned him and nine others to assassinate Abdul Karim Kassem, the despotic general ruling Iraq. Violence was a quick way for a young man who grew up fatherless in an impoverished village to get ahead; bloodshed became the major theme of his life.

During the failed assassination, Mr. Hussein suffered a bullet wound to the leg. The official version portrayed him as a hero who dug the bullet out with a penknife, while the other version suggests that the plot failed because he opened fire prematurely.

He sought asylum in Egypt, where President Gamal Abdel Nasser nurtured the region's revolutionary movements. Soon after returning to Iraq, Mr. Hussein married his first cousin and the daughter of his political mentor, Sajida Khairallah Tulfah, on May 5, 1963. The couple had two sons, Uday and Qusay, and three daughters, Raghad, Rana and Hala. He had mistresses, including prominent Iraqi women, but never flaunted them.

His wife, three daughters and roughly a dozen grandchildren survive him. Uday and Qusay, along with Qusay's teenage son, Mustapha, died in July 2003 during a gun battle with American forces in a villa in the northern city of Mosul. Denounced by an informant, they had been the two most wanted men in Iraq after their father.

The first years of Saddam Hussein's marriage coincided with political tumult in Iraq, with at least six coups or attempted revolts erupting between the assassination of King Faisal II in 1958 and the July 1968 putsch that brought the Baath Party to power.

Mr. Hussein's main role while still in his early 30s was organizing the party's militia, the seed of the dreaded security apparatus. By November 1969, he had eliminated rivals and dissidents to the extent that President Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr appointed him vice president and deputy chairman of the Revolutionary Command Council, as the cabinet was known. Mr. Hussein remained head of the intelligence and internal security agencies, in effect controlling Iraq.

The Arab Baath Socialist Party, whose name means "renaissance" in Arabic, had been formed in the 1930s to push a secular, socialist creed as the ideal path to achieving Arab unity. But that dogma proved a sinister excuse for the imprisonment, exile or execution of all potential rivals.

No other Arab despot matched the savagery of Mr. Hussein as he went about bending all state institutions to his whim. His opening act, in January 1969, was hanging around 17 so-called spies for Israel in a downtown Baghdad square. Hundreds of arrests and executions followed as the civilian wing of the Baath Party gradually eclipsed the Iraqi military.

Mr. Hussein staged perhaps his most macabre purge in 1979, when at age 42 he consolidated his hold on Iraq. Having pushed aside President Bakr, he called a gathering of several hundred top Baathists.

One senior official stepped forward to confess to having been part of a widespread plot to allow a Syrian takeover. After guards dragged the man away, Mr. Hussein took to the podium, weeping at first as he began reading a list of dozens implicated. Guards dragged away each of the accused. Mr. Hussein paused from reading occasionally to light his cigar, while the room erupted in almost hysterical chanting demanding death to traitors. The entire dark spectacle, designed to leave no doubt as to who controlled Iraq, was filmed and copies distributed around the country.

Firing squads consisting of cabinet members and other top officials initially gunned down 21 men, including five ministers. Iraq's state radio said the officials executed their colleagues while "cheering for the long life of the Party, the Revolution and the Leader, President, Struggler, Saddam Hussein."

Mr. Hussein invariably ensured that those around him were complicit in his bloody acts, which he masqueraded as patriotism, making certain that there would be no guiltless figure to rally opposition.

In an authoritative account of Mr. Hussein's government called "The Republic of Fear," the self-exiled Iraqi architect Kenaan Makiya (writing under the pseudonym Samir al-Khalil) estimated that at least 500 people died in the purge that consolidated Mr. Hussein's power.

Mr. Hussein's titles reflected his status as an absolute ruler modeled after one of his heroes, Josef Stalin of the former Soviet Union. They included president of the republic, commander in chief of the armed forces, field marshal and prime minister. In addition, the state-owned news media referred to him repeatedly as the Struggler, the Standard Bearer, the Knight of the Arab Nation and the Sword of the Arabs.

Mr. Hussein saw his first opportunity for Iraq to dominate the region in the turmoil that swept neighboring Iran immediately after its 1979 Islamic revolution. In September 1980, Mr. Hussein believed that by invading Iran he could both seize a disputed waterway along the border and inspire Iranians of Arab origin to revolt against their Persian rulers. Instead, they resisted fanatically. Mr. Hussein never acknowledged making a gross miscalculation; rather, he vilified the Iranian Arabs as traitors to the Arab cause.

Iraq fared badly in the war, not least because Mr. Hussein interfered in the battle plans despite a complete lack of military training, even issuing orders based on dreams. When strategies urged by Mr. Hussein failed, he often accused the commanders of betrayal, cowardice and incompetence and had them executed.
The Field Marshal
Mr. Hussein adored the macho trappings of the armed forces, appointing himself field marshal and dressing his ministers in olive-green fatigues. If he was a poor military strategist, he was fortunate in his first choice of enemy. The fear that an Islamic revolution would spread to an oil producer with estimated reserves second only to Saudi Arabia tipped the United States and its allies toward Baghdad and they provided weapons, technology and, most important, secret satellite images of Iran's military positions and intercepted communications.

The war lasted for eight years until Iran accepted a cease-fire in July 1988, with both sides terrorizing each other's civilian populations by rocketing major cities. But the March 1988 mustard gas attack on the Iraqi village of Halabja by its own government was perhaps the most gruesome incident.

Mr. Hussein waged war while investing in massive development that markedly improved daily life. Rural villages were electrified and linked by modern highways. Iraq boasted some of the best universities and hospitals in the Arab world - all free. Its painters, musicians and other artists, helped by government subsidies, were also the most accomplished in the region. Mr. Hussein had his own development methods. Anyone who avoided mandatory adult literacy classes in rural areas faced three years in jail.

Official corruption was unknown in Iraq in the 1980s, and religious worship somewhat free. Mr. Hussein occasionally took populist measures to underscore the importance of the public welfare. Once, for example, he decided that his ministers were too fat and he demanded that they diet, publishing their real weights and their target weights in the news media. Mr. Hussein's own weight could fluctuate from chubby to relatively trim, although well tailored suits hid his paunch. Around six feet tall, he was stocky and wore a trademark moustache.

In keeping with a ruler who used violence to achieve and sustain power, Mr. Hussein's most widespread investments were in his military. He ended the Iran-Iraq war with one million men under arms.

By then Iraq had embarked on extensive projects to acquire a homegrown arsenal of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. Iraq had also become a regional power, and Mr. Hussein expected to dominate the Arab world. In March 1990, he threatened to "burn half of Israel" if it ever acted against Iraq, even though the Israeli Air Force had humiliated the Iraqi leader by destroying his country's nuclear research center at Osirik in June 1981.

Mr. Hussein's next target was another neighbor, Kuwait, which Iraq had long considered part of Iraq and coveted for its deep-water port. On Aug. 2, 1990, his army swiftly occupied the tiny, immensely wealthy emirate, provoking an international crisis. Mr. Hussein declared the country Iraq's 19th province, installing a puppet government. Saudi Arabia and other conservative Arab states were shaken and outraged, while the United States and other Western countries feared for the oil fields ringing the Persian Gulf. The United Nations imposed a trade embargo and economic sanctions.

The United States and eventually 33 other nations deployed forces to the region and warned of a wider war if Mr. Hussein did not withdraw. He held onto Kuwait despite repeated threats from the United States, which dominated the military coalition by dispatching some 500,000 American soldiers. Mr. Hussein portrayed the invasion as the start of an Islamic holy war to liberate Jerusalem. He declared that the "throne dwarfs" of the gulf must be overthrown so their wealth could finance the Arab cause.

His public aims resonated among many Arabs in Jordan, Yemen and elsewhere, particularly because the brutality of Mr. Hussein's government had never been detailed by the state-controlled media of other Arab states. In addition, Mr. Hussein's Scud missiles crashing into Tel Aviv, however ineffective, created a stir in the Arab world.

Washington and its coalition allies hoped that the war would bring Mr. Hussein's downfall. Even before the war ended, President George H. W. Bush encouraged the Iraqi people to overthrow him, but there was no coherent plan. The ground offensive against Iraq ended after 100 hours, partly out of concern that American troops not occupy an Arab capital, partly because Arab allies feared the disintegration of Iraq and partly because a "100-hour war" made a good sound bite. Dick Cheney, then secretary of defense, warned that sending American forces to Baghdad would get them stuck in a "quagmire."

This decision enabled much of the elite Republican Guard to escape with minimal losses. The first Bush administration did little to support Shiite and Kurdish uprisings that erupted immediately after the war. Mr. Hussein crushed them.
Oil, Food and Weapons
For the next decade, Mr. Hussein repeatedly brought Iraq to the brink of renewed warfare by refusing United Nations weapons inspectors the access required to catalog and destroy Iraq's arsenal of unconventional weapons, as specified in the cease-fire agreement.

The United Nations maintained strict economic sanctions against Iraq until 1996, when some oil exports were allowed to pay for food, medicine and war reparations. The sanctions, devastating to Iraqis, proved a boon to Mr. Hussein and his subordinates. The Government Accountability Office in the United States Congress estimated that the Iraqi leader siphoned at least $10 billion from the program by making oil trades off the books and demanding kickbacks.

Still, in an effort to end sanctions, Baghdad over the years offered at least five "full, final and complete" weapons disclosures, which the United Nations dismissed as incomplete. Some of the most extensive revelations emerged after the astonishing August 1995 defection of Mr. Hussein's two sons-in-law and his two eldest daughters to Jordan. The Iraqi government was apparently worried that Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel al-Majid, a son-in-law and the minister in charge of weapons development, would disclose all that he knew. Six months later, the general and his brother abruptly declared they had accepted amnesty and returned. Within days, Mr. Hussein's daughters divorced them, and they died in a violent shootout.

Although family feuds often descended into bloodshed, Mr. Hussein tried to maintain strict control of his own image. He dyed his hair black and refused to wear his reading glasses in public, according to interviews with exiles published in The Atlantic Monthly in March 2002. Because a slipped disc caused him to limp slightly, he was never filmed walking more than a few steps. Each of his 20 palaces was kept fully staffed, with meals prepared daily as if he were in residence to disguise his whereabouts. Delicacies like imported lobster were first dispatched to nuclear scientists to be tested for radiation and poison.

His wine of choice was Portuguese, Mateus Rosé, but he never drank in public to maintain the conceit that he was a strict Muslim. He even had genealogists draw a family tree that linked him to Fatima, the daughter of the Prophet Muhammad.

He kept an immaculate desk, with reports from all the ministries neatly stacked. He usually read only the executive summaries, but would occasionally dig deeper and always complained that he was being deceived. He often was, with even his son Qusay telling military commanders to lie if Mr. Hussein thought something had been accomplished that was not.

He was particularly phobic about germs. Even top generals summoned to meet him were often ordered to strip to their underwear and their clothes were then washed, ironed and X-rayed before they could get dressed to see him. Mr. Hussein's American jailers reported that he tried to maintain those precautions, using baby wipes to clean meal trays, his table and utensils before eating.

Rarely traveling abroad, and surrounded by often uneducated cousins, he had a limited worldview. He once reacted with wonder when an American reporter told him that the United States had no law against insulting the president. Former officials portrayed him as a vain, paranoid loner who no longer believed he was a normal person and considered compromise a sign of weakness.

Saad al-Bazzaz, an Iraqi writer and editor, said that Mr. Hussein, having risen so far beyond the village and cheated death so often, believed that God anointed him.

Mr. Bazzaz told The Atlantic that even Mr. Hussein's speeches echoed Koranic texts. "In the Koran, Allah says, 'If you thank me, I will give you more,' " Mr. Bazzaz said. "In the early '90s, Saddam was on TV, presenting awards to military officers, and he said, 'If you thank me, I will give you more.' "
Controlling a Nation
Iraq under Mr. Hussein had a stifled quality. Imprisonment, torture, mutilation and execution were frequent occurrences, at least for those who chose to dabble in anything vaguely political. Simple information like the weather report was classified. There was no freedom of expression - even foreign newspapers were banned - and no freedom to travel. Contact with foreigners was proscribed.

There were widespread reports that Mr. Hussein himself periodically carried out the torture or even execution of those he felt had crossed him. In the summer of 1982, for example, Riyadh Ibrahim Hussein, the health minister, suggested during a cabinet meeting that Mr. Hussein step down to ease the negotiation of a cease-fire with Iran. Mr. Hussein recommended that the two retire to another room to discuss the proposal. When they did, a shot rang out. Mr. Hussein returned to the cabinet meeting alone, although in later interviews he denied killing anyone. The minister's widow was sent his dismembered corpse.

While assassinating Shiite Muslim religious leaders who opposed him, Mr. Hussein ordered mosques constructed around Baghdad on a scale not seen since it was the medieval capital of the Muslim caliphate. Perhaps the most striking was the Mother of All Battles mosque completed in 2001, the 10th anniversary of the Persian Gulf war. The minarets resembled Scud missiles, and the mosque held a Koran written with 28 gradually donated liters of Mr. Hussein's blood.

Evidence from inside Iraq after the invasion confirmed what United Nations weapons inspectors anticipated before - that Mr. Hussein abandoned the attempt to develop nuclear, biological and chemical weapons after his 1991 defeat. Orders from Mr. Hussein to destroy vestiges of the program, interpreted before the 2003 invasion as an attempt to hide their development, turned out to be an effort to comply with the ban.

The fatal controversy over whether Iraq was still developing unconventional weapons stemmed in part from Mr. Hussein's desire to convince different audiences of different things, a postwar study by the Defense Department concluded. He wanted the West to believe that he had abandoned the program, which he had. Yet he also wanted to instill fear in enemies like Iran and Israel, plus maintain the esteem of Arabs, by claiming that he possessed the weapons.

Some Bush administration critics argued that the accusations over unconventional weapons were a smoke screen, that government hawks were determined to topple Mr. Hussein as a way of reasserting American power. Richard Clarke, a former national security adviser to three presidents, described in his 2004 book "Against All Enemies" the scene in the White House in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks against the United States, with President Bush and other senior officials trying to link Mr. Hussein directly to Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden's organization. No such link was ever established.

Just before the invasion, Mr. Hussein, cigar in hand, appeared on television almost nightly, belittling American forces to small groups of Republican Guard commanders.

Yet his main concern was preserving his government, which the United States military discovered in interviews with his captured aides. Some of the unclassified results were published in a 2006 article in Foreign Affairs titled "Saddam's Delusions: The View From the Inside."

By 2003, Iraq's military was anemic, weakened by sanctions and constant changes in command, not to mention the fact that Mr. Hussein, suspicious of coup attempts, barred any rigorous maneuvers and repeatedly created new popular militias. Commanders also constantly lied to him about their state of preparedness. The United States report quoted Mr. Hussein's personal interpreter as saying that the president thought that his "superior" forces would put up a "heroic resistance and inflict such enormous losses on the Americans that they would stop their advance."

Mr. Hussein cited both Vietnam and the hasty American withdrawal from Somalia in 1994 as evidence, and did not take the threat of regime change seriously. He so much believed his own publicity about his success in fighting the first gulf war that he used it as a blueprint for the second. Hence, his main worry during the invasion was to avoid repeating the Shiite and Kurdish internal rebellions of 1991. He did not blow up the bridges over the Tigris and Euphrates to slow the American advance, for example, out of concern that he would need to rush troops south to quell any uprising.

The war plan as described in the 2006 book "Cobra II: The Inside Story of the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq" states that while Republican Guard troops were supposed to seal off the approaches to Baghdad, only the Special Republican Guard was permitted inside the capital, again as insurance against a coup. The collapse came so quickly that Mr. Hussein was still issuing orders to units that had ceased to exist.

After an April 9 sighting in public, he disappeared, apparently using up to 30 hiding places and the aid of loyal tribesmen to escape capture despite a $25 million reward. He often traveled as he had during the first gulf war, in a battered orange and white Baghdad taxi. He issued periodic messages encouraging the insurgency.

In a letter dated April 28 that was faxed to Al Quds al Arabi, an Arabic newspaper published in London, he blamed traitors for his ouster and urged Iraqis to rebel. "There are no priorities greater than expelling the infidel, criminal, cowardly occupier," he wrote.
A Leader's Legacy
In December 2003, his location was divulged by a clan member captured in a raid on a Baghdad house. Less than 11 hours later, 600 American soldiers and Special Operations forces supported by tanks, artillery and Apache helicopter gunships surrounded two farmhouses near the banks of the Tigris in Ad Dwar, a village about nine miles southeast of Tikrit, the tribal seat. The soldiers - no Iraqis were involved - found nothing on the first sweep. But on the second, more intensive search, under a trap door, Mr. Hussein was discovered lying at the bottom of an eight-foot-deep hole.

His first words when he emerged, nervous and disoriented, were, "I am Saddam Hussein, president of Iraq, and I am willing to negotiate," in halting English.

A Special Operations soldier there shot back, "President Bush sends his regards," the military said later. The main indication that the filthy, dilapidated concrete hut close by had been used by the former Iraqi president was a battered green metal suitcase holding $750,000 in neatly bundled bills.

Mr. Hussein, sporting a bushy salt-and-pepper beard, was first shown on television undergoing a medical exam for head lice. The pictures electrified and shocked Iraqis and the larger Arab world, with some cheering and some appalled to see a captive Arab leader put on undignified display.

He was imprisoned at Camp Cropper, near the international airport some 10 miles from Baghdad, on the grounds of a former palace complex that the United States military turned into a prison for senior members of the government. The prison consisted of three rows of single-story buildings surrounded by a double ring of razor wire.

Mr. Hussein was kept in solitary confinement - letters and care packages including cigars sent via the Red Cross from his wife and daughters living in Qatar or Jordan were his main contact with the outside world. He lived in a relatively spartan cell consisting of a bed, a toilet, a chair, a towel, some books and a prayer rug.

Some of his former American guards, interviewed for a July 2005 story in GQ magazine, said he acted in a fatherly way, offering advice on finding a good wife - "neither too smart nor too dumb, not too old nor too young" - and invited them to hang out in one of his palaces after he was restored to power. He claimed that President Bush had always known he had no unconventional weapons. His favorite snack was Doritos corn chips, his guards said.

Mr. Hussein was combative throughout his trial, using it as a platform to encourage the insurgents. The proceedings frequently seemed to slide toward chaos, with the star defendant and the judges shouting at each other. The trial, held in one of the grandiose buildings erected not far from Mr. Hussein's former presidential palace, proved something of a security nightmare, with three defense lawyers assassinated.

At one point, something he said prompted guffaws from a spectator in an overhead gallery. Mr. Hussein turned and pointed a finger, saying, "The lion does not care about a monkey laughing at him from a tree."

Mr. Hussein often tried to draw parallels between himself and the famous leaders of Mesopotamia, the earliest civilization in the region, as well as Saladin, the 12th-century Kurdish Muslim military commander who expelled the crusaders from Jerusalem.

What preoccupied him, he said, was what people would be thinking about him in 500 years. To the horror of historic preservationists, he had the ancient walls of the former capital, Babylon, completely reconstructed using tens of thousands of newly fired bricks. An archaeologist had shown him bricks stamped with the name of Nebuchadnezzar II in 605 B.C.

After the reconstruction, the small Arabic script on thousands of bricks read in part, "In the reign of the victorious Saddam Hussein, the president of the Republic, may God keep him, the guardian of the great Iraq and the renovator of its renaissance and the builder of its great civilization, the rebuilding of the great city of Babylon was done."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Saddam Hussein, Defiant Dictator Who Ruled Iraq With Violence and Fear, Dies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"I didn't say 'former president,' I said 'president,' and I have rights according to the Constitution, among them immunity from prosecution," he growled from the docket. The outburst underscored the boundless egotism and self-delusion of a man who fostered such a fierce personality cult during the decades that he ran the Middle Eastern nation that joking about him or criticizing him in public could bring a death sentence.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why has Canada banned assault-style firearms?

The ban was put in place to limit access to the most common assault-style firearms in Canada. These guns are designed for military use and can be used to injure or kill a large number of people quickly. The significant risk these firearms pose to public safety outweighs any justification for their continued use and availability in Canada.

The ban will freeze the Canadian market for these firearms, reduce the number and availability of assault-style firearms and lower the possibility of these firearms being sold into the illegal market. The ban took effect May 1, 2020.
See the full list of banned firearms
What can you do with a newly banned firearm?

There is an amnesty period until October 30, 2023. If you are the lawful owner of a banned firearm, an Amnesty Order protects you from criminal liability while you take steps to comply with the law.

The Government of Canada has committed to a buy-back program that would allow you to return your firearm for fair compensation. Businesses would be able to either turn in the firearm to the Government or return it to the manufacturer for compensation.

Until the buy-back program is implemented, banned firearms must be securely stored to meet all requirements for that type of firearm. Banned guns cannot be legally used, sold or imported, and can only be transported or transferred within Canada under certain conditions.
Learn more about your options

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The ban was put in place to limit access to the most common assault-style firearms in Canada. These guns are designed for military use and can be used to injure or kill a large number of people quickly. The significant risk these firearms pose to public safety outweighs any justification for their continued use and availability in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is Rape Culture?

Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture. Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women's bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women's rights and safety.

Examples of Rape Culture

Blaming the victim ("She asked for it!")

Trivializing sexual assault ("Boys will be boys!")

Sexually explicit jokes

Tolerance of sexual harassment

Inflating false rape report statistics

Publicly scrutinizing a victim's dress, mental state, motives, and history

Gratuitous gendered violence in movies and television

Defining "manhood" as dominant and sexually aggressive

Defining "womanhood" as submissive and sexually passive

Pressure on men to "score"

Pressure on women to not appear "cold"

Assuming only promiscuous women get raped

Assuming that men don't get raped or that only "weak" men get raped

Refusing to take rape accusations seriously

Teaching women to avoid getting raped

Victim Blaming

One reason people blame a victim is to distance themselves from an unpleasant occurrence and thereby confirm their own invulnerability to the risk. By labeling or accusing the victim, others can see the victim as different from themselves. People reassure themselves by thinking, "Because I am not like her, because I do not do that, this would never happen to me." We need to help people understand that this is not a helpful reaction.

Why is it Dangerous?

Victim-blaming attitudes marginalize the victim/survivor and make it harder to come forward and report the abuse. If the survivor knows that you or society blames her for the abuse, s/he will not feel safe or comfortable coming forward and talking to you.

Victim-blaming attitudes also reinforce what the abuser has been saying all along; that it is the victim's fault this is happening. It is NOT the victim's fault or responsibility to fix the situation; it is the abuser's choice. By engaging in victim-blaming attitudes, society allows the abuser to perpetrate relationship abuse or sexual assault while avoiding accountability for his/her actions.

What Does Victim-Blaming Look Like?

Example of Victim-Blaming Attitude: "She must have provoked him into being abusive. They both need to change."

Reality: This statement assumes that the victim is equally to blame for the abuse, when in reality, abuse is a conscious choice made by the abuser. Abusers have a choice in how they react to their partner's actions. Options besides abuse include: walking away, talking in the moment, respectfully explaining why an action is frustrating, breaking up, etc. Additionally, abuse is not about individual actions that incite the abuser to hurt his partner, but rather about the abuser's feelings of entitlement to do whatever he wants to his partner.

When friends and family remain neutral about the abuse and say that both people need to change, they are colluding with and supporting the abusive partner and making it less likely that the survivor will seek support.

How Can Men and Women Combat Rape Culture and Victim Blaming?

Avoid using language that objectifies or degrades women

Speak out if you hear someone else making an offensive joke or trivializing rape

If a friend says they have been raped, take your friend seriously and be supportive

Think critically about the media's messages about women, men, relationships, and violence

Be respectful of others' physical space even in casual situations

Let survivors know that it is not their fault

Hold abusers accountable for their actions: do not let them make excuses like blaming the victim, alcohol, or drugs for their behavior

Always communicate with sexual partners and do not assume consent

Define your own manhood or womanhood. Do not let stereotypes shape your actions.

Be an Active Bystander!

Adapted from Marshall University and Center for Relationship Abuse Awareness
Dating and Domestic Violence Facts

FACT: Regardless of their actions, no one deserves to be physically, verbally or sexually abused. In fact, putting the blame for the violence on the victim is a way to manipulate the victim and other people. Batterers will tell the victim, "You made me mad," or, "You made me jealous," or will try to shift the burden by saying, "Everyone acts like that." Most victims try to placate and please their abusive partners in order to de-escalate the violence. The batterer chooses to abuse, and bears full responsibility for the violence.

FACT: Many victims love their partners despite the abuse, blame themselves, or feel as if they have no support system or resources outside of the relationship and so they feel as if they can't leave. Furthermore, the period immediately after leaving an abusive relationship is extremely dangerous.

FACT: Jealousy and possessiveness are signs that the person sees you as a possession. They are one of the most common early warning sign of abuse

FACT: Abuse can come in many forms, such as sexual, physical, verbal, and emotional. When a person in a relationship repeatedly scares, hurts, or puts down the other person, it is abuse. Harassment, intimidation, forced or coerced isolation from friends and family and having an independent social life, humiliation, threats of harm to you or your family or pets, threats of suicide if you leave, violating your privacy, limiting your independence and personal choices are all examples of abuse.

FACT: While the majority of victims of domestic violence are women, men may also be victims of relationship violence. Men face many of the same barriers as women that prevent them from reporting abuse, but also face a different kind of stigma since many do not believe that men can be victims of dating/domestic violence.

FACT: The majority of men and young men in our community are not violent. The use of violence is a choice. Men who use violence in their relationships choose where and when they are violent. The large majority of offenders who assault their partners control their violence with others, such as friends or work colleagues, where there is no perceived right to dominate and control.

Stating that 'All men are violent' places the blame for the violence elsewhere and prevents the perpetrator from being responsible for his violence. The majority of men and women want and can be allies to help in the fight against this kind of violence.

FACT: As many as one-third of all high school and college-age young people experience violence in an intimate or dating relationship. Physical abuse is as common among high school and college-age couples as married couples.

Sexual Assault Facts

FACT: Men, women and children of all ages, races, religions, and economic classes can be and have been victims of sexual assault. Sexual assault occurs in rural areas, small towns and larger cities. It is estimated that one in three girls and one six boys will be sexually assaulted by the age of eighteen. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, a rape or attempted rape occurs every 5 minutes in the United States.

FACT: Sexual assault is NEVER the victim's fault. Sexual assault is a violent attack on an individual, not a spontaneous crime of sexual passion. For a victim, it is a humiliating and degrading act. No one "asks" for or deserves this type of attack.

FACT: Most sexual assaults are committed by someone the victim knows. Studies show that approximately 80%-90% of women reporting sexual assaults knew their assailant.

FACT: A sexual assault can happen anywhere and at any time. The majority of assaults occur in places ordinarily thought to be safe, such as homes, cars and offices.

FACT: Reported sexual assaults are true, with very few exceptions. According to CONNSACS, only 2% of reported rapes are false. This is the same rate of false reporting as other major crime reports.

FACT: Men can be, and are, sexually assaulted. Current statistics indicate that one in six men are sexually assaulted in their lifetime. Sexual assault of men is thought to be greatly under-reported.

FACT: Almost all sexual assaults occur between members of the same race. Interracial rape is not common, but it does occur.

FACT: Sexual assault is motivated by hostility, power and control. Sexual assaults are not motivated by sexual desire. Unlike animals, humans are capable of controlling how they choose to act on or express sexual urges.

FACT: Sexual offenders come from all educational, occupational, racial and cultural backgrounds. They are "ordinary" and "normal" individuals who sexually assault victims to assert power and control over them and inflict violence, humiliation and degradation.

FACT: Anytime someone is forced to have sex against their will, they have been sexually assaulted, regardless of whether or not they fought back or said "no". There are many reasons why a victim might not physically fight their attacker including shock, fear, threats or the size and strength of the attacker.

FACT: Survivors exhibit a spectrum of emotional responses to assault: calm, hysteria, laughter, anger, apathy, shock. Each survivor copes with the trauma of the assault in a different way.
Adapted from Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services (CONNSACS)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rape Culture, Victim Blaming, And The Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is Rape Culture? Rape Culture is an environment in which rape is prevalent and in which sexual violence is normalized and excused in the media and popular culture. Rape culture is perpetuated through the use of misogynistic language, the objectification of women's bodies, and the glamorization of sexual violence, thereby creating a society that disregards women's rights and safety.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Freedom of religion or belief, including the ability to worship in peace and security, is a universal human right. It is enshrined in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, among other key human rights documents. Discrimination against religious and belief communities, as with all forms of discrimination, causes suffering, spreads division, and contributes to a climate of fear, intolerance, and stigmatization. The right to freedom of religion or belief is intrinsically linked to other human rights, such as freedom of expression, peaceful assembly, and association, which are foundational to safe, prosperous, and inclusive societies.

The promotion and protection of human rights, including freedom of religion or belief, is an important aspect of Canada's constructive engagement in the world. Canada's multi-cultural and multi-faith experience is reflective of Canadian efforts to champion inclusive and accountable governance, pluralism, and respect for diversity in all spheres of society. Efforts to advance freedom of religion or belief internationally focus primarily on:

1. advocating on behalf of persecuted religious and belief communities under threat;

2. opposing religious hatred, discrimination and xenophobia; and

3. supporting dialogue among different faith and belief communities.

Recognizing the universal, indivisible, interdependent and interrelated nature of human rights, Global Affairs Canada continuously looks to broaden its approach to advancing freedom of religion or belief and fostering collaboration with less traditional partners. Freedom of religion or belief, which protects believers and non-believers alike, empowers people in all their diversity, either individually or in community with others, to decide for themselves what they believe and how they wish to live.

Canada has made the promotion of pluralism and inclusion, and the recognition of and respect for diversity a priority, both at home and abroad. In line with this commitment, Canada works with partners to enhance the international promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief. Canada will continue to stand in solidarity with all faith and belief communities against all hatred and intolerance and their desire to build a more just and inclusive world.

Multilateral engagement

International Contact Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief

On June 15, 2015, Canada launched the International Contact Group on Freedom of Religion or Belief (ICG-FoRB) bringing together a diverse, cross-regional group of over twenty countries and international organizations to promote and protect freedom of religion or belief around the world. By mobilizing a diverse group of countries committed to freedom of religion or belief outside of their traditional blocs, and allowing for frank discussion and the pursuit of areas for action, the ICG provides Canada and international partners with a useful platform to help address the growing repression of the individual right to believe and worship freely.

Since its inception, ICG participants have engaged in a number of cooperative actions, including: jointly advocating with governments to promote best practices to make progress on freedom of religion or belief, including those impacting minority populations; encouraging the reform of restrictive laws; and collaborating with a range of non-governmental partners, including faith and belief organizations, civil society, and academia.

Domestic engagement

Given that Canada is a multicultural, multi-faith and multi-ethnic society, enriched by vibrant Indigenous Peoples and heritages, linguistic duality, and a rich history of immigration and integration, Global Affairs Canada draws upon domestic voices and expertise to champion freedom of religion or belief on the international stage. Protection of human rights must begin at home, which is why we are actively working to combat antisemitism, Islamophobia, and all other forms of discrimination, exemplified through the appointments of a Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism and a Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, as well as Canada's Federal Anti-Racism Strategy. Global Affairs Canada's Office of Human Rights, Freedoms and Inclusion serves as the focal point for engagement with faith and belief communities to consult on issues of particular concern and to hear from Canadians their views on opportunities to advance freedom of religion or belief and human rights more broadly.

For example, on December 15, 2022, the Honourable Rob Oliphant, Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs, hosted an Interactive Dialogue on Freedom of Religion or Belief in Ottawa. The event, which featured Dr. Nazila Ghanea, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, brought together representatives of a diverse cross-section of Canadian faith and belief communities and civil society organizations, aimed leveraging their insights on the state of, and opportunities to advance, freedom of religion or belief globally. Participants were drawn from a variety of traditions, including Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Bahá'í, Sikh, Buddhist, and Secular Humanists, alongside a number of civil society organizations.

Related links

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Freedom of religion or belief, including the ability to worship in peace and security, is a universal human right. It is enshrined in both the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, among other key human rights documents.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gun violence in America is at a crisis point. Every day, more than 110 people are killed from guns and more than 200 are shot and wounded.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Destruction of Identity: Cultural Genocide and Indigenous Peoples

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
International law defines genocide in terms of violence committed “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,” yet this approach fails to acknowle…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is racism, really? And how do we end it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We all know that racism is a HUGE problem around the world. But have you ever thought critically about where racism comes from & how it differs from culture to culture? Drawing on lessons from hundreds of interviews, Brother Jeff offers 4 steps to get from racism to eracism in your own life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Johan Rockström: The tipping points of climate change — and where we stand | TED Talk

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We’re nearly halfway through the 2020s, dubbed the most decisive decade for action on climate change. Where exactly do things stand? Climate impact scholar Johan Rockström offers the most up-to-date scientific assessment of the state of the planet and explains what must be done to preserve Earth’s resilience to human pressure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Cultural Genocide and the Protection of Cultural Heritage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“Cultural Genocide and the Protection of Cultural Heritage” examines the various lenses through which the international community defines attacks on cultural …

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A collection of TED Talks (and more) on the topic of LGBTQIA+.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview
Around the world, people are under attack for who they are.
Living as a lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex (LGBTI) person can be life-threatening in a number of countries across the globe. For those who do not live with a daily immediate risk to their life, discrimination on the basis of one's sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression and sex characteristics, can have a devastating effect on physical, mental and emotional well-being for those forced to endure it.

Discrimination and violence against LGBTI people can come in many forms, from name-calling, bullying, harassment, and gender-based violence, to being denied a job or appropriate healthcare. Protests to uphold the rights of LGBTI people also face suppression across the globe.

The range of unequal treatment faced is extensive and damaging and could be based on:

your sexual orientation (who you're attracted to)

gender identity (how you self-identify, irrespective of the sex assigned at birth)

gender expression (how you express your gender, for example through your clothing, hair or mannerisms),

sex characteristics (for example, your genitals, chromosomes, reproductive organs, or hormone levels.)

Amnesty International campaigns to protect and uphold the rights of LGBTI people globally, including their right to life, freedom and safety.

Previous Next

What does it mean to be LGBTI?

The term LGBTI refers to a broad category of people, including those who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex, although we recognize that there are many terms around the world that are used by people to define their sexual orientation or gender identity. The terminology used can vary widely depending on historical, cultural and societal contexts.

It is well established in international human rights law that states must take steps to safeguard the rights of LGBTI people.

Gender identity vs sexual orientation

Gender identity refers to each person's deeply felt internal and individual sense of gender, which may or may not correspond with the sex assigned at birth. An individual's gender identity may be that of a man, woman, or outside the binary categories of man and woman; it may also be more than one gender, fluid across genders or no gender at all.

Sexual orientation refers to a person's capacity for profound emotional, affectionate and sexual attraction to, and intimate and sexual relations with other people. People experience sexual and romantic attraction differently. You can be attracted to people of a different gender, or the same gender as you. Some people are asexual, meaning they experience little to no sexual attraction.

What does it mean to be transgender?

Transgender (or trans) people have a gender identity that is different from typical expectations of the gender they were assigned at birth.

Some trans people might decide to get legal gender recognition or undergo gender affirmative interventions to help them feel more confident or comfortable living as their true gender.

Being transgender has nothing to do with a person's sexual orientation. You can be a trans man and be gay - or be a trans woman and be lesbian.

Not all transgender people identify as male or female. Some identify as more than one gender or no gender at all and might use terms like non-binary, agender, genderqueer or gender fluid to describe their gender identity.

What is gender affirmation?

Some trans people decide to affirm their gender identity, which is the process of living your life as the gender you identify with.

There is no single gender-affirming process. Some people may adopt new pronouns, change their name, apply for legal gender recognition, and/or undergo gender-affirming surgery or hormone therapy.

What is gender recognition?

Gender recognition, in theory, allows trans people to align their legally recognized gender with that of their own gender identity. For some trans people, having their gender legally recognized is an essential step towards being able to live freely, authentically and openly.

Unfortunately, even in countries where it is possible to affirm one's gender identity legally, the process is often dehumanizing, long and expensive.

In some countries, trans people need medical proof before they can get their gender identity legally recognized. This can be an invasive process and also reinforces the misinformed view that being trans is an illness. Unfortunately, despite the World Health Organization updating their guidelines to no longer recognize being transgender as a 'disorder', this attitude, is still prevalent in many societies around the world.

Requiring transgender people to undergo unnecessary medical treatments to obtain legal gender recognition violates their right to the highest attainable standard of health, which is protected under international human rights law, including by the UN Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.

For transgender people, official identity documents reflecting their gender identity are vitally important for the enjoyment of their human rights. They are not only crucial when travelling but also for everyday life. States must ensure that transgender people can obtain legal recognition of their gender through a quick, accessible and transparent procedure in accordance with the individual's own sense of their gender identity while preserving their right to privacy.

What does it mean to be non-binary?

Non-binary people have a gender identity that exists outside the categories of male and female. It is an umbrella term for various gender identities that lie outside of the gender binary. While some non-binary people may identify as trans, others may not.

Some non-binary people may use gender-neutral pronouns, such as they/them. Others may use a combination of gendered and gender-neutral pronouns, such as they/he or she/they. It is important to always respect people's pronouns. If you aren't sure what words to use to describe them, find polite ways to ask them.

There is an assumption that everyone's physical, hormonal and chromosomal characteristics fit neatly into either male or female. But that is not always the case, an estimated 1.7% of children in the world are born every year with variations of sex characteristics.

These variations are diverse; for instance, some children have genitalia outside the standard norms of male and female bodies, others have female reproductive organs but have XY (male) chromosomes, or male reproductive organs and XX (female) chromosomes.

These characteristics might be present at birth or become more apparent during or after puberty.

Many people with intersex variations are forced to undergo invasive, non-emergency and irreversible "normalizing" surgeries, often when they are children, and therefore cannot consent, but sometimes this can happen later in life. Many people Amnesty International has spoken to that have gone through such surgeries reported lasting negative impacts on their physical and mental health, sexual lives, psychological well-being and gender identity.

When performed without informed consent or adequate information, these surgeries violate people's right to physical bodily integrity and may have long-term consequences on their right to health and their sexual and reproductive rights, particularly since they can severely impede people's fertility.

Discrimination against LGBTI people

We are each protected against discrimination based on our sexual orientation, gender identity and/or expression and sex characteristics under international human rights law.

However, in practice, authorities in many countries that have signed international treaties, committing them to protect human rights, continue to implement and introduce legislations that singles out and discriminates against individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.

There are 64 countries around the world which have laws that criminalize homosexuality, many of which can be traced back to European colonization.

In some countries, such as Brunei, Iran, Mauritania, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Uganda and in the northern states in Nigeria, people can be sentenced to the death penalty if they engage in consensual same-sex sexual acts.

Discrimination goes beyond being criminally prosecuted for being an LGBTI person and can include limited access to healthcare, difficulty in securing employment, bullying or harassment in the workplace and much more.

LGBTI identity and intersectionality

Intersectionality is a term coined by black, feminist legal academic, Professor Kimberlé Crenshaw, and was first publicly explained in her 1989 essay ' Demarginalizing the Intersection of Race and Sex.'

The term 'intersectionality' was originally used to describe the multiple forms of inequality and discrimination black women face in the USA but has now become an international marker for defining ways that different forms of oppression and discrimination intersect with each other.

Many countries of the Global South may have their own knowledge and experiences of addressing intersecting oppression. Feminist academic Nivedita Menon gives the example of India - stating that there has been a long history of engaging with multiple, intersecting identities that can be traced back to the anti-imperialist struggle, without any reference to Crenshaw's work.

For example, an LGBTI person may experience discrimination because of their gender identity or sexual orientation, and oppression because of their race, class, caste, religion, ethnicity, (dis)ability, or age. In order to fight back against systems that oppress LGBTI people, we need to deconstruct all systems of oppression, including racism, imperialism, ableism, sexism, xenophobia, ageism or classism.

Pride as a Protest

What is Pride?

While Pride is often perceived as a celebration it originally began as a riot against police brutality at the Stonewall Inn in New York City. On 28 June 1969, the Stonewall Inn was raided by the police, as it had been on many occasions before, due to laws which required a 'man' or a 'woman' to be wearing clothing items which 'matched' their gender on their state-issued ID. As the LGBTI community in the Stonewall Inn, primarily led by trans women of colour, fought back, police brutality increased amid six days of riots which was a galvanizing force for LGBTI activism in the USA.

In many states around the world, Pride is still centrally and most importantly a protest which highlights, commemorates, and fights for the rights of LGBTI people.

Pride is marked differently in countries across the world. Many communities organize parades, marches and concerts that bring LGBTI people, allies, and the public together. But in other places, pride is actively shut down by governments and law enforcement agencies, leading to security risks for those participating.

While Pride has increasingly become one of the most visible modes of celebrating queer joy and resistance, LGBTI activism, protest and ways of coming together as a community have always existed across the world in different iterations. There are also several places in the world where Pride as a concept may not resonate with local LGBTI people, and they prefer to celebrate their identities in subtler, more locally relevant ways.

Amnesty is committed to ending discrimination against LGBTI people around the world.
We learn from the lived experiences of LGBTI people and make recommendations to governments and other influential leaders on how to improve laws. For example, our research on the rights of intersex people was one of the first of its kind from a human rights perspective and strongly influenced new laws in Denmark, Finland, Greece and Norway.

Amnesty also helps activists around the world by producing resources on various issues that affect LGBTI people. This work takes many forms, from an advocacy toolkit for activists countering discrimination in Sub-Saharan Africa to the Body Politics series aimed at increasing awareness around the criminalization of sexuality and reproduction.

There is still a lot of work to do and we endeavour to continue to push for the fulfilment of all the rights of LGBTI people, in close collaboration with partners, LGBTI groups and activists across the globe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Around the world, people are under attack for who they love, how they dress, and who they are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
All the latest content about Racism from the BBC.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
LGBTQ+ Inclusion and Support: An Analysis of Challenges and Opportunities Within 4-H

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
LGBTQ+ youth experience health disparities compared with heterosexual and cisgender youth. Community-based, positive youth development organizations are an important resource to support and affirm LGBTQ+ youth. This study aimed to identify the…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERROR: The request could not be satisfied

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
National Adaptation Strategy for Canada - Canada.ca

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By taking action to adapt to the changing climate, we can build communities and economies that are able to thrive for generations to come.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Traumatizing Impact of Racism in Canadians of Colour

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While research has identified racial trauma in other contexts, it is often overlooked amongst Canadian society. Racial trauma occurs as a result of an event of racism or cumulative events over time whereby an individual experiences stress and…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Culture, Morality and Connecting Across Differences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Buchtel is social psychologist and a assistant professor at EdUHK, interested in how cultural background can influence ideas about morality and moral character. She received her PhD from the University of British Columbia and previously taught English in China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Charterpedia - Section 2(b) – Freedom of expression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Department of Justice Canada’s Internet site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Trouble with Diversity: The Cultural Sector and Ethnic Inequality - Roaa Ali, Bridget Byrne, 2023

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Diversity has increasingly become coveted in the Creative and Cultural Industries (CCIs), with a significant presence in institutional and policy vocabularies.…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 1996, Thordis Elva shared a teenage romance with Tom Stranger, an exchange student from Australia. After a school dance, Tom raped Thordis, after which they parted ways for many years. In this extraordinary talk, Elva and Stranger move through a years-long chronology of shame and silence, and invite us to discuss the omnipresent global issue of sexual violence in a new, honest way. For a Q&A with the speakers, visit go.ted.com/thordisandtom.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Accessibility for people with disabilities is a Commission priority. Accessibility rights include the right to accessible services, transportation and employment. Complaints based on disability constitute the highest number of complaints made to the Commission each year. There is much work to be done to improve accessibility for Saskatchewan residents.

Disability covers a wide range of conditions and is an evolving concept. Some disabilities are visible while others are not. A disability may have been present since birth, developed over time, or caused by an accident.

Disability is defined in section 2 of The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code, 2018 as:

(a) any degree of physical disability, infirmity, malformation or disfigurement, including: (ii) any degree of paralysis; (iii) amputation; (iv) lack of physical coordination; (v) blindness or visual impediment; (vi) deafness or hearing impediment; (vii) muteness or speech impediment; (viii) physical reliance on a service animal, wheelchair or other remedial appliance or device; or (b) any of the following disabilities: (i) an intellectual disability or impairment; (ii) a learning disability, or a dysfunction in one or more of the processes involved in the comprehension or use of symbols or spoken language; (iii) a mental disorder;

Drug and alcohol dependencies and environmental sensitivities are also disabilities.

According to Statistics Canada's 2021 Census, the percentage of the adult population (aged 15-74) reporting any kind of disability in Saskatchewan is 27.7%. This number is estimated to increase because Saskatchewan has an aging population.

Accessibility rights are protected by a number of laws. The objects of The Saskatchewan Human Rights Code are:

to promote recognition of the inherent dignity and the equal inalienable rights of all members of the human family; and

to further public policy in Saskatchewan that every person is free and equal in dignity and rights and to discourage and eliminate discrimination.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees equality of the law including equal benefit of the law without discrimination.

Furthermore, Canada ratified The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (the Convention) on March 11, 2010.

The Convention recognizes that equality, dignity, autonomy, independence, accessibility and inclusion are essential for people with disabilities to fully realize equal citizenship in the world.

Parties to the Convention are required to promote, protect and ensure the full enjoyment of human rights by persons with disabilities, and to ensure that they enjoy full equality under the law. Given Canada's commitment to the Convention, existing laws, and the growing population of people with disabilities in Saskatchewan, it is the perfect point in history for Saskatchewan to renew its focus of an accessible society.

The United Nations recognizes resources to implement the Convention are limited, but also indicates that resource limitations cannot be an excuse to delay implementation. Accessibility must be advanced, though the UN recognizes it will be a slow, progressive process.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Accessibility Rights of Persons with Disabilities - Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Accessibility for people with disabilities is a Commission priority. Accessibility rights include the right to accessible services, transportation and employment. Complaints based on disability constitute the highest number of complaints made to the Commission each year. There is much work to be done to improve accessibility for Saskatchewan residents.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Overview

Disability is part of being human and is integral to the human experience. It results from the interaction between health conditions such as dementia, blindness or spinal cord injury, and a range of environmental and personal factors. An estimated 1.3 billion people - or 16% of the global population - experience a significant disability today. This number is growing because of an increase in noncommunicable diseases and people living longer. Persons with disabilities are a diverse group, and factors such as sex, age, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, race, ethnicity and their economic situation affect their experiences in life and their health needs. Persons with disabilities die earlier, have poorer health, and experience more limitations in everyday functioning than others.

Factors contributing to health inequities

Health inequities arise from unfair conditions faced by persons with disabilities.

Structural factors: Persons with disabilities experience ableism, stigma and discrimination in all facets of life, which affects their physical and mental health. Laws and policies may deny them the right to make their own decisions and allow a range of harmful practices in the health sector, such as forced sterilization, involuntary admission and treatment, and even institutionalization.

Social determinants of health: Poverty, exclusion from education and employment, and poor living conditions all add to the risk of poor health and unmet health care needs among persons with disabilities. Gaps in formal social support mechanisms mean that persons with disabilities are reliant on support from family members to engage in health and community activities, which not only disadvantages them but also their caregivers (who are mostly women and girls).

Risk factors: Persons with disabilities are more likely to have risk factors for non-communicable diseases, such as smoking, poor diet, alcohol consumption and a lack of physical activity. A key reason for this is that they are often left out of public health interventions.

Health system: Persons with disabilities face barriers in all aspects of the health system. For example, a lack of knowledge, negative attitudes and discriminatory practices among healthcare workers; inaccessible health facilities and information; and lack of information or data collection and analysis on disability, all contribute to health inequities faced by this group.

International frameworks

Countries have an obligation under international human rights law, and in some cases domestic laws, to address the health inequities faced by persons with disabilities. There are two important international frameworks which relate to health equity for persons with disabilities.

The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities requires States Parties to ensure that persons with disabilities have access to the same range, quality and standard of free or affordable health care as other people.

The World Health Assembly Resolution WHA74.8 on the highest attainable standard of health for persons with disabilitiescalls for Member States to ensure that persons with disabilities receive effective health services as part of universal health coverage; equal protection during emergencies; and equal access to cross-sectoral public health interventions.

Achieving health for all

Disability inclusion is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals and global health priorities to achieve health for all.

Universal health coverage will not be achieved if persons with disabilities do not receive quality health services on an equal basis with others. Investing in universal health coverage for persons with disabilities will benefit not only individuals but also communities.

There could be almost an US$ 10 return for every US$ 1 spent on implementing disability inclusive prevention and care for noncommunicable diseases.

Persons with disabilities must be considered when preventing and responding to health emergencies because they are more likely to be affected, both directly and indirectly. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, persons with disabilities living in institutions have been "cut off from the rest of society" with reports of residents being overmedicated, sedated, or locked up, and examples of self-harm also occurring (1).

In the COVID-19 pandemic, there are higher mortality rates among persons with intellectual disabilities (2), who are also less likely to receive intensive care services (3).

Promoting healthier populations through clean air and water, road safety, child nutrition and addressing violence against women will only be achieved if public health interventions for the wider population consider the needs, skills and capacities of persons with disabilities.

Women with disabilities being 2-4 times more likely to experience intimate partner violence than those without disabilities (4).

The WHO Report on health equity for persons with disabilities outlines 40 key actions for countries to take to strengthen their health systems and reduce health inequities for persons with disabilities. There are three things that all governments and health sector partners can do. First, they must consider health equity for persons with disabilities in all health sector actions. Second, they can include persons with disabilities in decision-making processes. Third, they can monitor how persons with disabilities are being reached and benefitting from health sector actions.

WHO response

WHO works to ensure persons with disabilities have equitable access to effective health services; are included in health emergencies preparedness and responses; and can access cross-sectoral public health interventions to achieve the highest attainable standard of health. Towards this goal, WHO:

guides and supports Member States on disability inclusion in health system governance and planning;

facilitates collection and dissemination of disability-related data and information;

develops normative tools, including guidelines to strengthen disability inclusion in the health sector;

builds capacity among health policymakers and service providers;

promotes strategies to ensure that people with disability are knowledgeable about their own health conditions, and that health care personnel support and protect the rights and dignity of persons with disabilities;

contributes to the United Nations Disability Inclusion Strategy (UNDIS) to promote "sustainable and transformative progress on disability inclusion through all pillars of work of the United Nations"; and

provides Member States and development partners with updated evidence, analysis and recommendations related to disability inclusion in the health sector.

References

1. Brennan, C.S., Disability Rights During the Pandemic: A Global Report on Findings of the COVID-19 Disability Rights Monitor. 2020, COVID-19 Disability Rights Monitor.

2. Williamson, E.J., et al., Risks of COVID-19 hospital admission and death for people with learning disability: population based cohort study using the OpenSAFELY platform. BMJ, 2021. 374: p. n1592.

3. Baksh, R.A., et al., Understanding inequalities in COVID-19 outcomes following hospital admission for people with intellectual disability compared to the general population: a matched cohort study in the UK. BMJ Open, 2021. 11(10): p. e052482.

4. Dunkle, K., et al., Disability and violence against women and girls. 2018, UKaid: London.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Disability is part of being human and is integral to the human experience. It results from the interaction between health conditions such as dementia, blindness or spinal cord injury, and a range of environmental and personal factors. An estimated 1.3 billion people - or 16% of the global population - experience a significant disability today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
About ScienceDirect
Shopping cart
Contact and
supportTerms and
conditionsPrivacy policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Charterpedia - Section 15 – Equality rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Department of Justice Canada’s Internet site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As peaceful protesters across the country stand up against police brutality and the systemic mistreatment of Black Americans, UNICEF condemns racism in any form.

For more than 70 years, UNICEF has been helping children caught up in conflict. Every child, every young person, deserves to grow up with every chance for safety and every opportunity to succeed. Discrimination, violence and racism cause deep harm, unsettling communities and leaving lasting scars for children and families.

We have always believed in the power of global citizenship to fight these biases. Here's how you and your family can help:

1. Listen to and amplify Black voices

Pay attention to the voices of people who experience racism every day. Share their stories with your friends and family.

2. Call out bigotry and hate speech

There has been a disturbing increase in hate speech in the U.S. in recent years. If you see something on social media or in the newspaper that reflects prejudice, leave a comment or write a letter to the editor to let others know that intolerant remarks are unkind and uncalled for.

If you overhear someone tell a racist joke, speak up and let them know that stereotyping isn't harmless. Let your children know they should feel free to speak up as well. There's nothing funny about using "humor" to normalize dangerous ideas and perpetuate ugly stereotypes.

3. Teach children about kindness, fairness and human rights

Prejudice and hate are not innate. They are learned behaviors - and they can be unlearned. Racism is a socially transmitted disease whose lifelong negative effects on the health and development of children and adolescents have been documented by the American Academy of Pediatrics.

So set a good example. Talk to your children regularly about differences and racism. Explain that racism is a system of unfairness and it has a long history in our country. Every human being has a right to feel safe and valued and to be treated fairly. If we want to fix the problem, we need to discuss it openly and be vigilant about it in our daily lives.

4. Stand up for people being harassed - intervene if it's safe to do so

If you see someone being harassed or physically attacked, it is important to help if you can do so safely. Make your presence as a witness known. Make eye contact with the person being attacked and ask if they want support. Don't escalate the situation.

When the public stands in solidarity, bigots lose their power. Verbal and physical abuse is wrong and should not be tolerated. All people deserve to be treated with dignity and humanity.

5. Support human rights organizations

How children are internalizing violence against people of color is a child rights issue. Systemic racism is a child rights issue. UNICEF has highlighted and advocated tirelessly for children's rights since its founding in 1946, and knows that all children deserve to grow up in a safe and healthy environment. Children who experience discrimination, racism and violence need our support now.
Join UNICEF in advocating for the rights of all children to grow up in a safe and healthy environment, with equal access to education and opportunity. Take Action

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Ways to Stand Up Against Racism and Injustice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Racism damages children, leaving deep and lasting scars. Here are five things your family can do now to help create a more just society.