# data[].attributes.body
1. Aboriginal women over the age of 15 are 3.5 times more likely to experience violence then womens whop are not aboriginal

2. Spousal assault for Aboriginal women are over 3 times higher then non aboriginal women

3. 16% of female homicide are indigenous women, 11% of missing women are indigenous women, but indigenous people are only 4,3% of Canada

# data[].attributes.body
1. The proportion of Indigenous people incarcerated in Canada is significantly higher than that of non-Indigenous people.

2. Compared to non-Indigenous persons, the incarceration rate for individuals of Indian descent was around nine times greater.

3. More years of life are lost by Indigenous people as a result of incarceration than by early deaths from heart disease, stroke, cancer, and accidents.

# data[].attributes.body
1. In 2021, 26680 foster children under the age of 15 were counted. That means there are a lot of kids who are foster kids (indigenous people)

2. Foster care was approximately 14 times more common (wich is a lot) among Indigenous children than non-Indigenous children.

3. There will be two ways for indigenous groups that have created their own laws to exercise their authority under the act.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Indigenous people are the fastest-growing and youngest segment of the Canadian population (most newborn's)

2. Indigenous people receive almost nothning or no mental health aid.

3. The major factors affecting indigenous people employement includes environmental racism,mental illnesses (caused by alcohol and drugs) and poverty.

# data[].attributes.body
1. There are 618 First Nations communities without access to clean drinking water.

2. The federal government pledged in 1991 that by 2001, everyone will have equitable access to clean water. We still haven't finished this assignment after thirty years.

3. In a first-world nation, Canada's indigenous populations live in third-world conditions.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Suicidal rates have been shown to be Higher among the first nations people then the non-indigenous people.

2. The suicidal rates for the indigenous people are 3 times higher then the non-indigenous people.

3. Young adults between the age of 15 to 24 are the highest rates of suicide in the indigenous community.

# data[].attributes.body
1. A bit more than 1/6 of Indigenous people lived in overcrowded homes that were deemed unfit for the people who lived there.

2. Approximately 1/6 of Indigenous people resided in homes that required significant repairs.

3. Nearly 1/5 of Indigenous people reside in low-income homes.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The completion of a college degree, CEGEP, or other non-university certificate or certification was the most typical highest level of education for indigenous people.

2. Compared to non-Indigenous individuals, Indigenous adults with a bachelor's degree or above were more likely to hold professional positions.

3. Overall, compared to the non-Indigenous population, Indigenous adults were less likely to work in professional jobs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Rates of Unemployment - #5 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Historically, Indigenous people have experienced higher unemployment rates than other Canadians. Why? This blog post answers that question.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Over-representation of Indigenous persons in adult provincial custody, 2019/2020 and 2020/2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Juristat article presents data and information on the extent of Indigenous over-representation in correctional systems across Canada in 2019/2020 and 2020/2021, using three new corrections indicators recently developed: Incarceration Rates for Indigenous and non-Indigenous persons, the Over-Representation Index, and the Custodial Involvement Rate. In addition, trends in the use of bail and remand will be explored, along with possible impacts on over-representation. The findings are presented from five provincial correctional service programs reporting to the Canadian Correctional Services Survey (CCSS): Nova Scotia, Ontario, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Overincarceration of Indigenous people: a health crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Indigenous people are greatly over-represented in the incarcerated population in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How many Canadian Indigenous voices will it take for us to remember that unemployment is an intersectional issue? Unemployment among Indigenous communities is definitely not rooted in a singular factor, but rather, is a quilt of a multitude of reasons spanning generations.

The Indigenous population comprises 4.9% of the Canadian population, totalling a rough estimate of 1.67 million people. Of this, the unemployment rate of Indigenous people is 11.6%, compared to that of non-Indigenous people is 7.6% from June to August 2021 (Bleakney et al., 2021). Why do Indigenous people have substantially higher unemployment rates? What barriers might they face in their pursuit of employment?

It is undeniable that Indigenous communities in Canada suffer from socioeconomic disparities fueled by a long, tragic history of mistreatment. Through the Residential School system, the 'cultural genocide' enforced by foreign settlers, as per the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, established a deeply painful chain of generational trauma, the effects of which are still evident today. Generational trauma is passed down in the family through genetics, and is experienced through specific behaviours of family members and their treatment of a child during early development. These behaviours give rise to problems like self-esteem issues, loss of identity, depression, mistrust, fatigue, and imbalanced immune responses, as well as a family history of diseases (Gillespie, 2020).

With such an array of interpersonal conflicts, it is expected that the Indigenous population of Canada should also receive comparable assistance from the government. Unfortunately, that is not the case. Indigenous communities receive little to no mental health aid that is actually accessible, explaining its adverse impact on employment rates. How is it equitable to expect trauma-ridden individuals to focus on job stability when they are still striving for a chance at mental stability?

Along with intergenerational trauma, Indigenous communities face socioeconomic and environmental disparities, creating a gap between the resources accessible to Indigenous versus non-Indigenous populations. One significant example of that gap is the inaccessibility of funded educational services. Indigenous communities on reservations do have access to one or two schools on the reserve for children under 18, however, these educational institutions tend to be so remote (or rather, the Indigenous reserves are), that countless children are sexually assaulted, kidnapped, and murdered on their way to and from school and never make it home. And even out of those who get home safely, their dreams of pursuing post-secondary education are often crushed once tuition costs and location are factored into the picture.

In 2018, Indspire, a charity focused on making education financially accessible to Indigenous students in Canada, published a summary of an in-depth survey of the experiences of Indigenous students pursuing post-secondary education (Post-secondary Experience of Indigenous Students, 2018). The most common message in the students' testimonies was the lack of funding and accessibility to financial aid in Canadian post-secondary institutions. Some students had no choice but to bring their children to class because they were unable to pay for childcare and were too far away from their family and community (Post-secondary Experience of Indigenous Students, 2018).

Stemming from this, another issue that the survey-takers mentioned is that without adequate financial aid for housing, childcare, food, and tuition, many students inevitably chose to drop out of school to work minimum wage jobs (if hired) to sustain themselves, and/or focus on their home life. Without a solid educational background and access to any external career-building resources, the youth remain unqualified for high-paying, stable jobs, and the unemployment rate increases.

Other major factors affecting Indigenous Canadians' employment struggles include environmental racism, mental illnesses - which often inform alcohol and drug usage - and poverty. An example of environmental racism would be strategic policies, creation and locations of institutions and houses surrounding a target community, which gives that population a specific disadvantage. Indigenous reserves often receive muddy, dark brown, contaminated water, a problem which issues the Boil Water Advisory, and the prey that they consume is ridden with dangerous contaminants, because of their proximity to mining rigs (Luo, 2021). This results in chronic illness, gastrointestinal disorders, and cancer. Due to the remote nature of Indigenous reserves, most individuals don't have quick access to reputable hospitals, public transportation, and driving tests, and cannot afford a car or be eligible for insurance.

There is also a very limited selection of minimum wage jobs in nearby communities. As a result, job security is scarce. When you pile on drug and alcohol usage triggered by mental illness and physical health issues, it is evident that an individual cannot possibly ace a job interview, or work efficiently in these conditions.

These socioeconomic factors tie into self-esteem issues and the emotional and physical effects of intergenerational trauma. This is hardly a position conducive to job interviews and employment, is it? And the undeniable, glaring topic of racism in the hiring process and work environment has not even been touched upon yet.

It is clear that there are many hurdles that Indigenous job seekers in Canada must overcome to simply get a foot in the door. Most non-Indigenous Canadians have never had to, and may never will, think about these issues, further contributing to negligence from recruiting agents and coworkers. It is important for all of us to stay educated and aware, seek out ways to help, ensure we are not unconsciously contributing to the aforementioned negligence, and have compassion when amplifying Indigenous voices.

SOURCES Bleakney, A., Masoud, H., & Robertson, H. (2021, November 16).
This article uses data from the Labour Force Survey to examine trends in employment, unemployment and labour force participation among indigenous people in the 18 months following the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. trends for indigenous and non-Indigenous people, by age group, sex, region and occupation, as well as for First Nations people and Métis, are presented. Labour market impacts of COVID-19 on Indigenous people living off reserve in the provinces: March 2020 to August 2021. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/45-28-0001/2021001/article/00037-eng.htm

Luo, C. (2021, November 14). The water crisis in Canada's First Nations communities. ArcGIS StoryMaps. https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/52a5610cca604175b8fb35bccf165f96

Gillespie, C. (2020, October 27). Generational trauma might explain your anxiety and depression-here's what it means. Health. https://www.health.com/condition/ptsd/generational-trauma Post-secondary experience of indigenous students following the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (2018, September). https://indspire.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/PSE-Experience-Indigenous-Students-Survey-Summary-Sept2018.pdf

This article was written by summer student Ilesha Prabhudesai and edited by summer student Cossette Penner-Olivera. This article was funded by the Government of Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Unemployment Crisis of Indigenous People in Canada | Journey to Diversity Workplaces

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How many Canadian Indigenous voices will it take for us to remember that unemployment is an intersectional issue? Unemployment among Indigenous communities is definitely not rooted in a singular factor, but rather, is a quilt of a multitude of reasons spanning generations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to text

Text begins

Highlights

In 2021, over one in six Indigenous people (17.1%) lived in crowded housing that was considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there.

The share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing declined overall among all three groups (First Nations, Métis and Inuit) from 2016 to 2021, including among First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve. However, for Inuit living in Nunavut, the Inuvialuit region and outside Inuit Nunangat, the share living in crowded housing increased from 2016 to 2021.

Multigenerational households were the most common living arrangement among First Nations people living in crowded housing (34.5%), followed by couples living with children (21.7%). Among Métis and Inuit living in crowded housing, the most common living arrangement was couples living with children.

Indigenous people were almost twice as likely to live in crowded housing in 2021, compared with the non-Indigenous population (17.1% versus 9.4%). However, the gap between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population narrowed by 1.7 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

In 2021, 16.4% of Indigenous people lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs.

First Nations people and Métis were less likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021, compared with five years earlier. For Inuit overall, the share living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021 was similar to 2016 levels, while Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat (+1.2 percentage points) were more likely to live in housing needing major repairs.

Indigenous people were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs (16.4%) in 2021 than the non-Indigenous population (5.7%). Nevertheless, the gap between the Indigenous and non-Indigenous population narrowed by 2.3 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

Introduction

Adequate and suitable housing that provides residents with a safe environment to live and work in is essential for mental and physical well-being and a higher quality of life. Living in poor housing conditions, such as houses with overcrowding, mould or structural defects, is associated with the spread of infectious and respiratory diseases, chronic illness, injuries, and poorer mental health. ,

In 2019, the National Housing Strategy Act declared that "the right to adequate housing is a fundamental human right affirmed in international law" and recognized that having an affordable and safe place to live gives individuals and families the environment they need to succeed, grow and live in dignity. However, many Indigenous people in Canada live in inadequate housing, particularly among those living in remote or northern communities.

Although the 2016 Census of Population revealed that housing conditions among Indigenous people had improved overall, they remained much more likely to be living in inadequate housing than the non-Indigenous population.

This article uses new data from the 2021 Census of Population to report on housing conditions among Indigenous people in Canada. In addition, it will examine how housing conditions have changed among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit since 2016.

Over one in six Indigenous people live in crowded housing

Over one in six Indigenous people (17.1%, or 309,345 people) lived in housing that was considered not suitable for the number of people who lived there, according to the National Occupancy Standard. Housing suitability is a measure of crowding, which refers to whether a dwelling has enough bedrooms for the size and composition of the household.

Crowded housing is categorized into dwellings that have a shortfall of one, two, or three or more bedrooms. Just over 1 in 10 Indigenous people (10.7%) lived in housing that had a one-bedroom shortfall, 3.7% lived in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall, and 2.8% lived in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

Nevertheless, the share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing declined by 0.9 percentage points from 2016 to 2021.

While the share of Indigenous people living in crowded housing remained much higher than the non-Indigenous population (17.1% versus 9.4%), the gap between the two groups narrowed from 9.5 percentage points in 2016 to 7.8 percentage points in 2021.

Fewer Indigenous people live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with five years earlier

Approximately one in six Indigenous people (16.4%, or 295,745 people) lived in a dwelling that was in need of major repairs in 2021, down 2.7 percentage points from 2016.

Dwellings in need of major repairs include those that require major repairs such as defective plumbing or electrical wiring and those that require structural repairs to walls, floors or ceilings.

Although Indigenous people were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs (16.4%) than the non-Indigenous population (5.7%) in 2021, the gap narrowed by 2.3 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people living on reserve are more likely to live in crowded housing

Over one in five First Nations people (21.4%, or 224,280 people) lived in crowded housing in 2021, with 12.9% living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 4.8% living in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall and 3.8% living in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms. Overall, the share of First Nations people living in crowded housing declined by 1.2 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people who had Registered or Treaty Indian status under the Indian Act were over twice as likely to live in crowded housing, compared with First Nations people without Registered or Treaty Indian status (25.4% versus 11.2%).

First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve were almost twice as likely to live in crowded housing, compared with those who lived off reserve (35.7% versus 18.4%). However, the share of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living in a crowded dwelling on a reserve fell at a faster pace from 2016 to 2021, compared with that of their counterparts living off reserve (-0.6 percentage points versus -0.2 percentage points).

Just over one-third (34.5%) of First Nations people in crowded housing were living in a multigenerational household, with at least one person living with a child and a grandchild. This share was higher (44.9%) among First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve.

In multigenerational households, grandparents play an important role in raising children and passing on traditional values, knowledge and teachings to younger generations. In addition, living in a multigenerational household may be a family's solution to housing issues in their community, such as affordability or housing shortages.

Other common living arrangements among First Nations people living in crowded housing included couples living with children (21.7%) and one-parent families (18.2%).

Nationally, First Nations people were most likely to live in crowded housing in Manitoba (35.7%) and Saskatchewan (34.3%) and least likely to do so in Atlantic Canada.

Fewer First Nations people living in a dwelling in need of major repairs

In 2021, almost one in five First Nations people (19.7%, or 206,845 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, down 3.9 percentage points from 2016.

First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status were more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with those without Registered or Treaty Indian status (22.8% versus 12.0%).

Over one-third of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living on reserve lived in a dwelling in need of major repairs (37.4%), almost three times the rate of their counterparts living off reserve (12.7%). Nevertheless, the share of First Nations people with Registered or Treaty Indian status living in a dwelling in need of major repairs on a reserve fell at a faster pace from 2016 to 2021 than the share of those living off reserve (-6.5 percentage points versus -1.4 percentage points).

Nationally, the share of First Nations people living in dwellings in need of major repairs was highest in the Northwest Territories (30.0%) and Manitoba (28.7%) and lowest in Newfoundland and Labrador (8.6%).

Approximately 1 in 12 Métis live in crowded housing

Approximately 1 in 12 Métis (7.9%, or 49,565 people) were living in crowded housing in 2021, down 0.6 percentage points from 2016.

In 2021, 6.2% of Métis were living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 1.3% were living in housing with a two-bedroom shortfall and 0.5% were living in housing with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

Among Métis living in crowded housing in 2021, one-quarter were living in a household composed of a couple with children (25.6%). Other common living arrangements among Métis living in crowded housing included one-parent families (23.3%) and multigenerational households (22.0%).

Nationally, the share of Métis living in crowded housing was higher in Yukon (10.9%), the Northwest Territories (10.7%) and Manitoba (10.0%), and lower in Newfoundland and Labrador (4.4%) and Nova Scotia (4.9%).

In 2021, 335,350 Métis were living in a census metropolitan area (CMA) of 100,000 or more people. Métis living in a CMA were more likely to live in crowded housing, compared with their counterparts living outside a large city (8.3% versus 7.5%). Among those living in large cities, the highest share of Métis living in crowded housing was seen in Kingston (14.8%), Toronto (11.3%) and Winnipeg (11.1%).

Métis less likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with five years earlier

In 2021, approximately 1 in 10 Métis (10.0%, or 62,640 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, down 1.2 percentage points from 2016.

The share of Métis living in a dwelling in need of major repairs was lowest in Newfoundland and Labrador (8.2%), British Columbia (9.0%), and Alberta (9.0%), and highest in the Northwest Territories (19.4%), New Brunswick (13.7%) and Yukon (13.2%).

Métis living outside a large city were more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with their counterparts living in a CMA (11.5% versus 8.7%). However, among Métis residing in CMAs, the share living in a dwelling in need of major repairs was higher for those in Trois-Rivières, Quebec (15.9%); Saint John, New Brunswick (14.6%); and Moncton, New Brunswick (12.5%).

Just over half of Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat-specifically Nunavut-live in crowded housing

Just over two in five Inuit (40.1%, or 28,260 people) lived in crowded housing in 2021, with 20.7% living in housing with a one-bedroom shortfall, 10.0% with a two-bedroom shortfall and 9.4% with a shortfall of three or more bedrooms.

This large share of Inuit living in crowed housing was mainly driven by those living in Inuit Nunangat, who were four times more likely to live in crowded housing than Inuit living outside Inuit Nunangat (52.9% versus 11.4%). Inuit Nunangat is the traditional homeland of Inuit, which includes Nunatsiavut (Labrador), Nunavik (northern Quebec), Nunavut and the Inuvialuit region (Northwest Territories).

Among Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat, those living in Nunavut (60.0%) were the most likely to live in crowded housing, while those in Nunatsiavut (17.7%) were the least likely to do so.

Within Inuit Nunangat, the lack of access to appropriate and affordable housing is well documented. Inuit living in these regions face a number of challenges, including high construction, operation and maintenance costs. In addition, due to barriers such as higher costs of living, fewer employment opportunities, lower income levels and the lack of housing markets for resale, many Inuit rely on public or subsidized housing.

Among Inuit living in crowded housing in 2021, the living arrangements were mostly made up of couples living with children (36.3%) and multigenerational households (35.4%). Over one-third of Inuit living in crowded housing in Inuit Nunangat were couples living with children (37.2%) or multigenerational households (36.7%). Outside Inuit Nunangat, approximately one-quarter of Inuit living in crowded housing were couples living with children (27.6%) or multigenerational households (22.9%).

Overall, the share of Inuit living in crowded housing edged down 0.6 percentage points from 2016 to 2021. There were fewer Inuit living in crowded dwellings in Nunatsiavut (-2.5 percentage points) and Nunavik (-5.1 percentage points) compared with five years earlier, and more Inuit living in crowded housing in Nunavut (+3.6 percentage points), the Inuvialuit region (+1.9 percentage points) and outside Inuit Nunangat (+0.4 percentage points).

Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat are more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs

Over one-quarter of Inuit (26.2%, or 18,460 people) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs in 2021. However, Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat were almost three times more likely to live in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with their counterparts living outside Inuit Nunangat (32.7% versus 11.5%).

Within Inuit Nunangat, approximately one-third of Inuit in Nunavut (35.5%) and the Inuvialuit region (33.0%) were living in a dwelling in need of major repairs, compared with one-quarter of Inuit living in Nunatsiavut (28.2%) and Nunavik (26.5%).

Overall, Inuit were as likely to be living in dwellings in need of major repairs in 2021 as they were in 2016. However, Inuit living in Inuit Nunangat were more likely to be living in a dwelling in need of major repairs (+1.2 percentage points) compared with five years earlier, while Inuit living outside Inuit Nunangat (-0.6 percentage points) were slightly less likely to be living in a dwelling requiring major repairs.

Looking ahead

In the coming months, releases from the Census of Population will provide more comprehensive data for Indigenous people living in Canada. Upcoming data releases for the 2021 Census include education and labour force characteristics, which will provide a more comprehensive socioeconomic portrait of Indigenous populations in Canada.

Additional information

Additional analysis on First Nations people, Métis and Inuit can be found in the Daily article; in the Census in Brief article on Métis in Canada, Catalogue no. 98-200-X; and in the article on shelter costs on reserve.

Additional information on First Nations people, Métis and Inuit can be found in the data tables; the Census Profile, Catalogue no. 98-316-X; and the Focus on Geography Series, Catalogue no. 98-404-X.

For details on the concepts, definitions and variables used in the 2021 Census of Population, please consult the Dictionary, Census of Population, 2021, Catalogue no. 98-301-X.

In addition to response rates and other data quality information, the Guide to the Census of Population, Catalogue no. 98-304-X, provides an overview of the various phases of the census, including content determination, sampling design, collection, data processing, data quality assessment, confidentiality guidelines and dissemination.

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared by Alexandria Melvin and Thomas Anderson of Statistics Canada's Centre for Indigenous Statistics and Partnerships, with the assistance of other staff members in that centre, and the collaboration of staff members of the Census Subject Matter Secretariat, Census Operations Division, Communications Branch, and Data Access and Dissemination Branch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Housing conditions among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada from the 2021 Census

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Census in Brief article reports on housing conditions among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in 2021. It describes the share of First Nations people, Métis and Inuit living in crowded dwellings and dwellings in need of major repair, and reports variation by provinces, territories, and the regions of Inuit Nunangat.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Indigenous People face the worst housing outcomes in the country.

Hon. Marc Miller, Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations [1]

To understand the complexities of the housing situation, some basic information on the reserve system, created in 1876, is required. The two articles linked below provide an overview of on-reserve housing.

In Canada, the Indigenous population grew by 9.4 percent from 2016 to 2021; however, the housing stock in Indigenous communities did not increase even close to the same rate. The 2022 federal budget allocated $4.3 billion over seven years towards mitigating the housing crisis, a figure that falls far short of what is needed, according to the Assembly of First Nations, which asked for $44 billion to deal with overcrowding and homes in dire need of repair in reserves.

The housing crisis at a glance:

18 percent of Indigenous households living in urban, rural and northern areas are experiencing core housing needs, meaning their housing falls below at least one of the adequacy, affordability or suitability standards.

18.8 percent of the Indigenous population live in low-income households.

Nearly a quarter of Indigenous children ages 14 and younger live in low-income households in 2021, more than double that of non-Indigenous children.

Almost one in six Indigenous people lived in a home needing major repairs in 2021, a rate nearly three times higher than the non-Indigenous population.

17.1 percent of Indigenous people live in overcrowded housing, almost double the number of non-Indigenous people living in crowded housing

Inuit living in crowded housing: 40.1 percent

First Nations living in crowded housing: 21.4 percent

Métis living in crowded housing: 7.9 percent

Indigenous people are overrepresented among the 35,000 people who experience homelessness each night in Canada.

Photo: Unsplash

Indigenous people are more than twice as likely to experience hidden homelessness (couch surfing), especially in the north, compared to their non-indigenous counterparts.

The higher rates of homelessness for Indigenous people are associated with systemic barriers in education, employment, and the intergenerational effects of colonization.

Indigenous people living off-reserve have lower homeownership rates and are more likely to live in subsidized housing.

According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, there is a $636 million annual gap between what Indigenous households living in off-reserve rural, urban and northern communities pay for housing and what is deemed affordable.

Assembly of First Nations and the Institute of Fiscal Studies and Democracy released a joint study in 2021 that identified the need for housing in First Nation communities at about 55,000 new units and 81,000 renovations on reserve.

Impacts of the housing crisis

Physical and mental health & housing

As noted above, Indigenous people frequently live in overcrowded houses that need significant repairs. Common issues include poor ventilation, broken windows, leaky roofs, and water-damaged walls, all of which create a fertile environment for the rapid spread of viruses. Moisture in the walls and ceilings leads to mould growth, triggering asthma and respiratory diseases.

Overcrowded living conditions impact mental health in many ways:

Stress, anxiety and depression

Sleep problems

Physical health problems

Relationship difficulties

Education & housing

Not having access to a quiet space for homework and studying affects a child's school performance. Poor performance in school impacts a child's opportunity for higher education and employment. Children growing up in crowded houses may not get the sleep they need, leading to difficulty concentrating in school, fatigue and behavioural issues. Behavioural issues can result in negative interactions with teachers and peers, which may, later in life, impact personal and professional relationships.

Employment & housing

When physical and mental health and education are negatively impacted, finding and keeping stable employment is also impacted.

Culture & housing

The on-reserve housing crisis drives some community members to relocate to urban centres for better accommodation. Separated from family, community and culture, they are often at their most vulnerable. Students who leave communities for higher or better education opportunities may be unable to return to their communities due to the housing crisis.

Family violence & housing

Empty red dresses representing missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls and two-spirit people. Photo: Bob Joseph

Overcrowded, unsafe housing is a factor in the higher rates of gender-based violence against Indigenous women, girls and gender-diverse people. Housing shortages may force women and children to remain in unsafe living situations.

Climate change & housing

Indigenous communities are often identified as most vulnerable to climate change, specifically fire and flood events. When homes are destroyed, it exacerbates the already crowded living conditions as the same number of people are now living in fewer homes.

Reserves were frequently located on floodplains. People living in flood-prone reserves deal with substantial risks, including property damage, deteriorated health, and disrupted livelihoods and education due to repeated and sometimes prolonged, evacuations. Emergency removal from their homes and separation from family is also traumatic for residential school survivors.

80.7% of the 985 Indigenous reserves have some flood exposure in terms of either population or residential properties at the 100-year return period. [2]

The Kashechewan First Nation community members have been evacuated 14 times to at least 22 host communities across Ontario since 2004 (consecutively from 2004 to 2008 and 2012-2019) because of actual flooding events or flooding risk and the potential failure of the dike that surrounds the community. [3]

Reserves are also located in forests prone to wildland fires, and it's projected that wildland fires will increase in number, size, and intensity due to climate warming. Reserves are often remote with limited access, which makes evacuation challenging and exacerbates firefighting efforts.

Approximately 12.3% of the Canadian population currently live in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), which includes 32.1% of the on-reserve First Nations population. Currently, 17.8% of the on-reserve WUI population is exposed to FRI of ≤250 years, compared with only 4.7% of the remaining WUI population. [4]

The housing crisis is at the epicentre of many barriers Indigenous Peoples endure. The Liberals have pledged to develop an urban, rural, and northern Indigenous housing strategy. They have budgeted $300 million over five years to allow the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to work with Indigenous communities to build to create a plan.

For those looking for further learning, our Working Effectively with Indigenous Peoples® training has helped thousands of individuals and organizations better understand Indigenous history, culture and how the Indian Act affects Indigenous Peoples today.

[1] Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, The Effects of the Housing Shortage on Indigenous Peoples in Canada, Evidence, 4 March 2022
[2] Chakraborty, L., Thistlethwaite, J., Minano, A. et al. Leveraging Hazard, Exposure, and Social Vulnerability Data to Assess Flood Risk to Indigenous Communities in Canada. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 12, 821-838 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13753-021-00383-1
[3] Thistlethwaite, J., Minano, A., Henstra, D., Scott, D., Indigenous Reserve Lands in Canada Face High Flood Risk, Centre for International Governance Innovation, Policy Brief No. 159 - April 2020
[4] Erni, S., Johnston, L., Boulanger, Y., Manka, F., Bernier, P., Eddy, B., Christianson, A., Swystun, T., Gauthier, S. Exposure of the Canadian wildland-human interface and population to wildland fire, under current and future climate conditions 9 April 2021
Featured photo: Siksika Nation, Alberta - May 2, 2021, Shutterstock

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Inadequate Housing and Crowded Living Conditions - #3 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article explains some of the basic information about the reserve system to understand the housing situation's complexities better.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Skip to text

Text begins

Start of text box
Mental wellness resources and crisis help for First Nations people, Métis and Inuit
End of text box

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the review of preliminary findings and/or draft versions of the report by Indigenous organizations, including Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the Métis National Council, and the National Association of Friendship Centres, and federal departments including Indigenous Services Canada and Crown Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada. The analysis and the report were greatly strengthened by the suggestions and recommendations provided in the process. We also thank Jodie Golden, Public Health Agency of Canada ( PHAC) for reviewing the draft report for safe messaging.

Abstract

Suicide rates have consistently been shown to be higher among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada than the rate among non-Indigenous people; however, suicide rates vary by community, Indigenous group, age group and sex. The historical and ongoing impacts of colonization, forced placement of Indigenous children in residential schools in the 19th and 20th centuries, removal of Indigenous children from their families and communities during the "Sixties scoop" and the forced relocation of communities has been well documented. These resulted in the breakdown of families, communities, political and economic structures; loss of language, culture and traditions; exposure to abuse; intergenerational transmission of trauma; and marginalization, which are suggested to be associated with the high rates of suicide. While suicide among Indigenous people has been examined previously, studies were based on a decades-old cohort or used an area-based geozones approach. Past studies also examined suicides among only one or two Indigenous groups using the same methodology. Finally, they did not examine suicide among Indigenous people for some geographies such as on and off reserve, rural areas and small, medium and large population centres.

This article attempts to fill some of these knowledge gaps using the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC), resulting from a record integration between the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) and the Canadian Vital Statistics Database (CVSD). It presents suicide rates for the 2011 to 2016 time period among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit, and non-Indigenous people in private dwellings in Canada. It also explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in the disparity in risk of suicide between First Nations people, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous people in Canada.

Suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit were significantly higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people. The rate among First Nations people (24.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk) was three times higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk). Among First Nations people living on reserve, the rate was about twice as high as that among those living off reserve. However, suicide rates varied by First Nations band, with just over 60% of bands having a zero suicide rate. The rate among Métis (14.7 Note E: Use with caution deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk) was approximately twice as high as the rate among non-Indigenous people. Among Inuit, the rate was approximately nine times higher than the non-Indigenous rate (72.3 versus 8.0 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk). Suicide rates and disparities were highest in youth and young adults (15 to 24 years) among First Nations males and Inuit male and females.

Socioeconomic factors, including household income, labour force status, level of education, marital status and geographic factors such as living on or off reserve (First Nations people) and community size (Inuit) accounted for a notable proportion of the disparity in risk of death by suicide among First Nations people (78%), Métis (37%) and Inuit (40%) adults, 25 years or older. However, due to limitations of the data, the role of other previously-identified factors such as historical and intergenerational trauma, community distress, cultural continuity, family strength and mental wellness were not explored here.

The findings from this study could contribute further to the understanding of suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada, particularly with respect to the variability in suicide rates and socioeconomic factors associated with the disparity in suicide risk.

Introduction

First Nations people living on and off reserve, Métis and Inuit, die by suicide at a higher rate than non-Indigenous people. These suicides not only result in loss to family, friends and peers leading to immense grief and bereavement, but also to the community and society at large, in particular when the deceased is a young person. The impact of suicide is more widespread and severe in small Indigenous communities where many people are related and many experience similar personal and collective adversity.

The suicide rate for children and youth was previously reported to be 10 times higher among males and 22 times higher among females between 2005 and 2007 in areas with a high percentage of First Nations people compared with low-percentage areas. In Inuit Nunangat, the Inuit homeland made up of the Inuvialuit Region (northwest part of Northwest Territories), Nunavut, Nunavik (Northern Québec), and Nunatsiavut (Northern Labrador), the suicide rate among children and youth was 33 times higher than for the rest of Canada between 2004 and 2008. In fact, suicide is one of the leading causes of death among children and youth in areas with a high proportion of First Nations people and in Inuit Nunangat.

In adults, the suicide rates (1991 to 2006) among First Nations people and Métis have been reported to be twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults. The suicide rate among adults in Inuit Nunangat (1999 to 2003) was four times higher than the rate among all adults in Canada; the disparity was greater among men than women.

It is important to note, however, that national level suicide rates may underestimate regional or community level differences. For example, previous reports have shown that suicide rates among First Nations youth in British Columbia range from 0 to 633 deaths per 100,000 people by tribal council. In fact, the majority of these tribal councils had a zero or very low suicide rate. A similar regional variance has been seen among Inuit communities in Nunavut. The suicide rate varied from under 50 deaths per 100,000 in Whale Cove to just over 250 deaths per 100,000 people in Qikiqtarjuaq.

Several representatives of Indigenous peoples and governments, communities and government agencies have developed programs, policies or strategies to address the high suicide rate among First Nations people, Inuit and Métis. Development and evaluation of these require timely data on suicide rates. Many existing estimates of suicide rates are based on an older cohort (1991 Census cohort), which excluded non-tax filers and those under 25, or are from studies that used an area-based geozones approach. The latter classified areas with higher proportions of First Nations residents as First Nations "identity areas" or examined mortality rate in Inuit Nunangat as a proxy for the rate among Inuit. These approaches may have led to under or over estimation of suicide rates. In addition, past reports have only estimated suicide rates among one or two Indigenous groups using the same methodology. Finally, there are gaps in knowledge of suicide rates among Indigenous people for certain geographical areas, including urban areas and on or off reserve.

This article presents suicide rates among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous peoples, who lived in private dwellings (i.e., excluding those who were in collective dwellings and institutions), for the 2011 to 2016 time period. These findings are based on the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC), which was developed by integrating records in the the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) and the Canadian Vital Statistics - Deaths Database (CSVD from 2011 to 2016). Suicides that occurred over the follow up period of 5.63 years (from Census day on May 10, 2011 to end of follow-up on December 31, 2016) were used to generate age-standardized and age-specific mortality rates. These are presented as estimated number of deaths by suicide per 100,000 person-years at risk. The person-year concept is often used in cohort studies and represents unit of time when individuals are at risk of dying, and can be roughly understood as persons per year. Specifically, the article (1) presents suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit alongside comparisons with the suicide rates of non-Indigenous people to explore disparities, a better understading of which could inform prevention strategies, (2) presents the estimated proportion of First Nations bands that experienced no suicides as an estimate of the variability in suicide rates, and (3) explores the role of socioeconomic and geographic factors in explaining the excess mortality from suicide among the three groups.

Results

Suicide among First Nations people in Canada

In the current analyses, among the 851,280 First Nations people (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights), including status and non-status individuals, living on and off reserve and in private dwellings in 2011, an estimated 1,180 people died by suicide between 2011 and 2016. This resulted in an age-standardized suicide rate of 24.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 1), which was three times higher than the suicide rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The suicide rate was higher among males than females (29.6 versus 19.5, respectively). This pattern is similar to that seen among non-Indigenous people among whom males (12.3) also had a higher suicide rate than females (3.9). However, these numbers indicate that the disparity in suicide rates - measured by dividing the suicide rate among First Nations people by that among non-Indigenous people (or rate ratios [ RR]) - between First Nations and non-Indigenous peoples is higher among females than males (RR = 5.0 among First Nations females and RR = 2.4 among First Nations males; Table 1).

﻿

Suicide rates were highest among youth aged 15 to 24 (48.7; non age-standardized) (data not shown) when compared with other age groups. Suicide rates were lower among the older age groups. They were significantly higher among First Nations people than non-Indigenous people in most age groups under 45 years of age, but the disparities were widest among those under 15 years ( RR = 8.9) and 15 to 24 years ( RR = 6.3) (data not shown). This was particularly apparent among females between 15 and 24 years of age ( RR = 12.0; Table A.1 in appendix).

The suicide rate was nearly twice as high among First Nations people living on reserve than among First Nations people living off reserve (non age-standardized rate of 34.1 versus 19.5, respectively). Among on-reserve First Nations people, suicide rates were highest for males aged 15 to 24 years (78.8) (Chart 1). Rates were lower in the older age groups among both males and females on reserve (Table A.2 in appendix). Disparities were particularly elevated among 15 to 24-year-old First Nations females living on reserve ( RR = 15.8) in comparison to non-Indigenous females across Canada. Disparities were smaller in the older age groups, but continued to be seen until age 55 for females and age 45 for males. For those aged 55 and older, suicide rates were not statistically different between on-reserve First Nations and non-Indigenous people. A similar comparison to rates among First Nations people living off reserve was not done since most age-specific estimates were not published due to low cell counts or precision (table A.2 in appendix).

No significant differences were seen in the suicide rates among First Nations people (on and off reserve combined) by province and territory. However, in every province, the suicide rate among First Nations people was higher than the non-Indigenous rate (Atlantic provinces were grouped together to increase sample size; suicide rates were not reportable for the non-Indigenous population in Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut). And, the rate ratios were notably higher in the Prairie provinces. It was 4.6, 4.5 and 3.5 in Manitoba, Saskatchewan and Alberta, respectively. In other provinces, it ranged from 1.9 to 2.6. Suicide rates did not differ significantly by type of population centre. It was 28.8 among First Nations people in rural areas, 22.9 Note E: Use with caution among those in small population centres and 18.8 Note E: Use with caution among those in large population centres. The suicide rate among First Nations people in each of these areas was significantly higher compared with non-Indigenous rates (9.3 for rural areas, 9.0 for small population centres and 7.2 for large population centres).

These national and provincial level estimates, while useful, underestimate the variability in the suicide rates among individual First Nations communities. Suicide rates were estimated at the band level using a geographic approach (for more details, please refer to the methods section). Of the just over 600 First Nations bands in Canada, 555 were associated with reserves that were enumerated in the 2011 NHS and with individuals in the CanCHEC cohort. Just over 60% of First Nations bands had experienced no suicides between 2011 and 2016. The proportion of bands without suicides, when examined in the context of the overall on-reserve suicide rate among First Nations people (34.1) highlights the obscuring of variability in the national level estimate. This proportion of bands with zero suicide rate varied by province and territory. A larger proportion of bands in the Atlantic provinces (55%), Ontario (71%), Saskatchewan (53%), British Columbia (78%), Yukon (80%) and Northwest Territories (74%) had zero suicide rates. In the other provinces, the proportion ranged from 39% to 44%. It should be noted that 31 reserves were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 Census many of which were in Ontario and Québec (a brief description of these reserves can be found in the methods section), and were not included in this analysis. Also, band members who did not live on their band's reserve at the time of the Census were not included in the analysis.

Socioeconomic factors have previously been shown to be associated with suicide among Indigenous people in North America. To examine if similar patterns were evident in the 2011 CanCHEC cohort, the role of individual socioeconomic factors such as household income, labour force status, level of education, marital status and geographic factors such as living on or off reserve on risk of death by suicide were examined for First Nations people aged 25 years or older. After adjusting for age and sex, the risk of suicide among First Nations adults was twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.0; Table A.4 in appendix). Adjusting for household income resulted in a decrease in risk by 35%. After further adjusting for labour force status, level of education and marital status, First Nations adults were still at a higher risk of suicide than non-Indigenous adults ( HR = 1.4). Together, these factors accounted for 66% of the excess suicide risk. Further adjusting for living on and off reserve resulted in a HR of 1.2, which was not significantly different from 1.0. Together, all these factors accounted for 78% of the excess suicide risk among First Nations adults.

Suicide among Métis in Canada

Based on the current analysis, of the 452,985 self-identifying Métis (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights) who lived in private households in 2011, approximately 415 individuals died by suicide in the 2011 to 2016 period. As a result, the suicide rate was 14.7 Note E: Use with caution deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 2), which was nearly twice as high as the rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The rate among Métis males (22.6 Note E: Use with caution ) was more than three times higher than the rate among Métis females (7.2 Note E: Use with caution ). The suicide rate was nearly twice as high among Métis (22.6 Note E: Use with caution ) as non-Indigenous males (12.3). However, the suicide rates for Métis (7.2 Note E: Use with caution ) and non-Indigenous females (3.9) were not significantly different from each other.

﻿

Among the provinces and territories, because of low counts when broken down, suicide rates for Métis could only be generated for Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia combined (Ontario and west). In these provinces, the rate among Métis (13.4 Note E: Use with caution ) were higher than that among non-Indigenous people (7.6). Suicide rates among Métis in rural (16.5 Note E: Use with caution ), small (12.8 Note E: Use with caution ) and large population centres (15.5 Note E: Use with caution ) were not significantly different. The rate among Métis in large population centres was higher than the rate among non-Indigenous people (7.2; marginally significant). Suicide rates could not be published for medium population centres due to low cell counts.

Among Métis adults over 25, after adjusting for age and sex, the risk of suicide was twice as high as that among non-Indigenous adults (hazard ratio = 1.9; Table A.4 in appendix). Adjusting for household income, labour force status, population centre type of place of residence, level of education and marital status accounted for 37% of excess suicide risk. The risk of suicide was 1.6 times higher among Métis than non-Indigenous people after adjusting for these factors.

Suicide among Inuit in Canada

There were approximately 59,220 Inuit in Canada in 2011 who lived in private households (based on population estimates using the 2011 CanCHEC and its weights). Among them, there were an estimated 250 deaths by suicide between 2011 and 2016. This lead to a suicide rate of 72.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years at risk (Table 3). This was nine times higher ( RR = 9.0) than the suicide rate among non-Indigenous people (8.0). The suicide rate was three times higher among Inuit males than Inuit females (109.3 versus 35.4 Note E: Use with caution , respectively).

﻿

Suicide rates among Inuit were highest in youth; the highest suicide rate was seen among Inuit males between 15 and 24 years of age (363.2; non age-standardized) living in Inuit Nunangat (Chart 2). Publishable estimates could only be produced for Inuit females between the ages of 15 and 24 and 25 to 34. Suicide rate among females 15 to 24 years of age was 108.9 Note E: Use with caution , which was 33 times higher than non-Indigenous females of that age (Table A.3 in appendix).

Rates among Inuit were also compared by Inuit Nunangat region. Rates were significantly higher among Inuit in Nunatsiavut (188.2 Note E: Use with caution ; non age-standardized) than those in Nunavik (98.1) and Nunavut (94.0). Rates among Inuit in Inuvialuit region could not be published due to low reliability of estimates.

The national, Inuit Nunangat and Inuit regional level estimates underestimate the variation in rates among individual Inuit communities. Among the 50 Inuit communities, 11 communities had a suicide rate of zero. However, for most communities (66%), estimates were too unreliable to be published. It should be noted that some deaths may not have linked to the NHS and others may not have been in Vital Statistics at the time of data integration. The latter shortcoming has previously been reported by Jack Hicks. These exclusions may have biased the estimate of number of communities without suicides.

In multivariate analyses, among Inuit adults 25 years and older, the risk of death by suicide was 4.8 times higher than the risk among non-Indigenous adults, after accounting for age and sex (Table A.4 in appendix). After further adjusting for household income, labour force status, level of education and marital status, the hazard ratio decreased to 3.4 suggesting that these factors accounted for 37% of the excess risk of death by suicide among Inuit. After adjusting for size of community (population centre type), Inuit adults were still at 3.3 times higher risk of suicide than non-Indigenous adults ( HR = 3.3). All combined, these factors accounted for 40% of the excess risk of suicide among Inuit adults.

Discussion

The report is the first to examine suicide rates among all three Indigenous peoples, including First Nations people, Métis and Inuit, of different age groups and living in different geographies using one methodology. However, gaps in knowledge remain. Further research is needed to assess long-term trends and estimate the role of other risk and protective factors of suicide among Indigenous peoples, which should be done in consultation with First Nations people, Métis and Inuit, as recommended by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

In the current analysis, the suicide rates among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit were many times higher than the non-Indigenous rate during the 2011 to 2016 time period. The rates were highest among Inuit and, specifically, adolescents and young adults. The suicide rate among First Nations people living on reserve was higher than that among those living off reserve, and among males than females. The higher suicide rate among males has been attributed to their tendency to use more lethal methods and to the differential effect of specific stressors in the two sexes. However, greater disparities were observed among First Nations females, where higher suicide rates were seen when compared with non-Indigenous females. These patterns are similar to what has been previously reported.

Of particular concern is the high rate of suicide among Indigenous children under 15. The suicide rate among First Nations boys, nationally, was four times higher than among non-Indigenous boys. It was ten times higher among First Nations boys living on reserve. As with other national trends, this rate may obscure regional differences. Previously reports have suggested that in some remote First Nations communities in Ontario, under-15 suicide rates were nearly 50 times higher than non-Indigenous rates. And, among Inuit communities of Nunatsiavut, the age-specific disparity was largest among 10 to 19-year-olds relative to their non-Indigenous counterparts outside Inuit Nunangat ( RR = 15.8). Also, rate of death by suicide among Inuit children 10 to 14 years of age appears to be increasing since 1989 although significant fluctuations are seen across time. In line with these rates among children, suicidal ideation among grade 5 to 8 school children in Saskatoon was nearly twice as high among Indigenous children as non-Indigenous children after accounting for mental health, cognitive abilities and bullying experiences. While risk factors for suicide among children are numerous and complex, a recent report suggests that Inuit children and youth in Nunavut experience a lack of mental health services that are specific to them, culturally relevant and of adequate quality.

And, while time trends were not examined here, suicide attempts among First Nations people in British Columbia have been reported elsewhere to be declining. Risk of self-inflicted injury hospitalization among Registered Indians, and disparity between them and their non-Indigenous counterparts decreased between 1991 to 2010. However, this is in contrast to trends in remote First Nations communities in Ontario. There, Indigenous youth suicide was previously reported to be on the rise because of the emergence of suicide among communities that previously did not experience it, exposure to suicide or suicide attempts among family members and peers, and increase in clusters of suicides.

Methods

Data

The 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC) used here is a population-based integrated dataset that follows the non-institutional (household) population enumerated in the 2011 National Household Survey (NHS) for different health outcomes such as mortality, cancer, and hospitalizations. Briefly, record integration for the 2011 CanCHEC was carried out using Statistics Canada's Social Data Linkage Environment (SDLE). The SDLE helps create linked population data files for social analysis through integration to the Derived Record Depository (DRD), a dynamic relational database containing only basic personal identifiers. Survey and administrative data are linked to the DRD using a generalized record integration software that supports deterministic and probabilistic integration.

The NHS is a voluntary survey, conducted in May 2011, of approximately 4.5 million (30%) private dwellings randomly selected from the 2011 Census of Population. The NHS covers all persons who usually live in Canada, including permanent and non-permanent residents, and individuals living on First Nations reserves, Métis settlements or Inuit communities. There were 36 incompletely enumerated First Nations reserves in the 2011 NHS. In 13 of these communities, enumeration was delayed because of forest fires in Northern Ontario and occurred at a later date. The NHS excludes residents of institutions (for example, hospitals, nursing homes, penitentiaries) and collective dwellings (for example, work camps, hotels, shelters).

Records for approximately 6.7 million NHS respondents were eligible for integration; 97% linked to the DRD using a probabilistic approach based on telephone number, surnames, given names, birthdate, and place of residence. No differences in integration rates were found by collection mode, province, sex, or birth decade. To ensure representativeness of the linked cohort, weights were calculated to adjust for non-integration.

To protect the confidentiality of Census respondents, data made available for analysis did not contain personal identifiers such as name, and address. In addition, estimates based on small cell counts (fewer than five deaths or fewer than 10 total individuals) were suppressed.

Variables

Self-reported Indigenous identity, age, sex, household income, labour force status, highest level of education, marital status and province of residence variables were available in the 2011 NHS dissemination dataset. Variables for the Inuit Nunangat regions were generated using Standard Geographical Classification (SGC) codes. Similarly, a variable for on and off-reserve areas of residence was generated using SGC. A binary suicide variable was created using ICD-10 codes in the "Underlying cause of death" variable in the CVSD. Generation of suicide and person-years at risk variables are described in the following section.

Estimation of weighted suicide rates

For suicide rate estimates, each person's time at risk of death by suicide was split into single years of follow-up, and within each year of follow-up, into durations before and after birth date. In the process, each person was aged on his or her birthday. This allows for the appropriate categorization into age groups for computing suicide rates. Weighted age-standardized suicide rates (ASMRs) (see figure 1 for a brief description of this measure) and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated. Those under the age of one were excluded from the analysis due to under-representation of this group in the integrated dataset. Briefly, ASMRs were computed by dividing the count of cohort members who died by suicide in the follow-up period by the total person-years at risk. Age standardization was done with age-specific mortality rates in 5-year age groups using the 2011 total Indigenous population as the reference population. Weighted age-specific suicide rates generated without age standardization were used for comparisons between age groups within an Indigenous group or between an Indigenous group and the non-Indigenous population. These rates were also used to compare suicide rates in the on and off-reserve First Nations populations since their age structures were somewhat similar in 2011 (median age: 23.9 and 27.1 years, respectively). Suicides were identified using the following International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revisions ( ICD-10) codes: X60-X84, Y87.0. For each member of the cohort, person-years of follow-up were calculated as the number of days from the beginning of the study period to the date of death or end of study divided by 365.25. Variance was calculated using 500 bootstrap weights.

Description for Figure 1
﻿

Figure 1 is a schematic showing the method used to estimate the suicide rate using number of deaths as the numerator and person-years as the denominator. The schematic illustrates a hypothetical example with seven individuals who were "followed" from May 10, 2011 (Census day) to December 31, 2016 (end of follow-up period) to see if they had died. In this example, three of the seven individuals died during follow-up. Person 1, 4 and 7, who died during the follow-up period, each contributed 3.0, 1.5 and 4.2 person-years at risk, respectively, to the denominator. The others, who were alive as of December 31, 2016, each contributed 5.6 person-years to the denominator. In all, the seven individuals contributed 31.1 person-years to the denominator. The crude mortality rate is calculated by dividing the number of deaths by the total person-years contributed by the seven individuals, and multiplied by 100,000. In this hypothetical example, the crude suicide-related mortality rate is 9,646.3 deaths per 100,000 person-years of follow-up.

Age-standardized and age-specific suicide rates, expressed as the number of deaths by suicide per 100,000 person-years at risk, were generated by sex, Indigenous identity and select geographic areas. Indigenous identity, as self-reported in the 2011 NHS Survey, included: First Nations, Métis, Inuit, Multiple Indigenous identity, Indigenous identity responses not indicated elsewhere and non-Indigenous. However, in this paper, only estimates for single identity groups are presented. Geographic areas studied include: province/territory; on or off-reserve; rural areas or small, medium and large population centres, and for Inuit, inside/outside Inuit Nunangat and by the four regions of Inuit Nunangat (Nunatsiavut, Nunavik, Nunavut, and the Inuvialuit region), as well as outside Inuit Nunangat. Rate ratios, or the ratio of suicide rate among First Nations people, Métis or Inuit over suicide rate among non-Indigenous people were computed to examine the magnitude of disparity in the Indigenous group compared to the non-Indigenous population. To estimate variance of the rate ratios, variance and covariance of the mortality rates in the Indigenous group of interest and non-Indigenous population were estimated using PROC RATIO in SAS-callable SUDAAN. Variance of the rate ratios was then computed using Taylor linearization and the variance and covariance estimates from PROC RATIO, and used in generating 95% confidence intervals.

Hypothesis testing was done to identify suicide rates that were significantly different from one another using p<0.05. The weighted number of suicides and suicide rates were not published if (1) the unweighted number of suicides in a cell was less than five, (2) the weighted population count in the cell were less than 10, or (3) coefficient of variance (CV) was greater than 33.3% (40% for those under 15 years). Weighted numbers of suicides were also randomly rounded to base five. ASMRs with CV greater than 16.6% and less than or equal to 33.3% are presented with an "E" to indicate that these should be used with caution.

Estimation of suicide rate by First Nations band

For estimating suicide rates by First Nations band, reserve CSDs associated with each band were grouped. Reserves that were shared by multiple bands were grouped separately. This was done for seven reserves. Three of these had a population of 10 or less. And, one was incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS. This grouping resulted in about 600 First Nations bands. Of these, 561 included individuals that were in the 2011 CanCHEC. Others were associated with reserves that were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS or had participated in the 2011 Census and not the NHS. In the end, 555 bands were included in the analysis. Suicide rates were computed by First Nations band, from which the number and percentage of bands with a reportable zero suicide rate were identified. The percentage of bands with a zero suicide rate were calculated with and without the reserves that were associated with multiple bands and were found to be similar.

Multivariate analysis

To examine the role of socioeconomic and geographic factors in the excess risk of suicide among Indigenous people relative to non-Indigenous people, Cox proportional hazards modelling was performed. Analyses were restricted to those 25 years and older to allow for the use of labour force status, level of education and marital status as covariates. For this analysis, age at baseline on Census day, was used since other covariates also had the same reference period. Hazard ratios for suicide were estimated among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit (with non-Indigenous people as the reference group). Covariates were entered sequentially into the model in this order: age group together with sex, household income quintile (based on after-tax income adjusted for economic family size), labour force status (employed, unemployed and not in the labour force), highest level of education (less than high school, high school, post-secondary education below Bachelor's level and university degree), marital status (never legally married or single, legally married and not separated, separated but still legally married, divorced or widowed) and living on or off reserve (for First Nations people) or in population centres or rural areas (for Métis and Inuit). Household income quintiles were generated for each province and territory separately to account for regional differences. In secondary analysis, household income was used as a continuous variable or household income quintiles were generated at the national level and used in place of the original income quintile variable to examine the robustness of the influence of this predictor on the relative risk of death by suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit. Covariates were chosen based on previous literature on the relationship between socioeconomic factors and suicide. and the availability of related variables in the 2011 NHS data.

From the hazard ratios (age and sex-adjusted and additionally adjusted for socioeconomic factors), the percent of excess risk of suicide among First Nations, Métis and Inuit people accounted for by household income, labour force status, highest level of education, marital status and geography was computed. The proportion of excess mortality explained was calculated as the difference between the age and sex-adjusted and the final hazard ratios, divided by the former minus 1. Analyses were not carried out separately by sex due to sample size limitations.

Assessing validity of suicide rates

Suicide rates based on the linked 2011 CanCHEC cohort were compared with previously generated estimates using different methodologies to assess validity.

The non age-standardized suicide rate for the total population of Canada between 2009 and 2013 was previously estimated to be 11.4 deaths per 100,000 people; in comparison, in the CanCHEC cohort, the overall suicide rate was 10.5 deaths per 100,000 person years between 2011 and 2016. While there are no published rates of suicide for First Nations people, Métis and Inuit for the 2011 to 2016 period, suicide rates for all individuals in Inuit Nunangat, which is home to 73% of Inuit in Canada, was previously estimated to be 83.5 deaths per 100,000 people. In the 2011 CanCHEC cohort, the rate was 83.5 deaths per 100,000 person years at risk. However, the estimates by Inuit Nunangat region between 2011 and 2016 (167.3 Note E: Use with caution in Nunatsiavut, 87.5 in Nunavik and 83.1 in Nunavut) were somewhat different in comparison to previous estimates from the 2009 to 2013 period (185.4, 98.3, 79.0, respectively). While, the estimates are similar, there are several potential reasons for this discrepancy between the two sets of estimates. While there is some overlap in time periods for the two estimates (2009 to 2013 for previous estimates and 2011 to 2016 for the estimates in this report), they are not identical. There is some year-to-year fluctuation in suicides rates. For example, in Nunavut, previous estimates suggest that the rate ranged from 58.2 to 108.5 deaths per 100,000 people. Some deaths that occurred between 2011 and 2016 were not linked to the 2011 NHS. Also, the CanCHEC cohort excludes institutional population (e.g., nursing homes, jails), and those living in collective dwellings (e.g., motels, hotels, rooming houses) at the time of census collection and those that were not enumerated by the 2011 NHS. The denominators used in the two studies are also different; in the previously published tables, the suicide rates are per 100,000 people; in the current study, the rates are per 100,000 person years.

Limitations

Several limitations of the analysis should be noted. Suicide rates presented in this article may underestimate the true rates because of (1) exclusion of the institutional population and population living in collective dwelling, (2) exclusion of persons not enumerated by the 2011 NHS including the homeless among whom Indigenous people are overrepresented, (3) non-integration of some deaths between 2011 and 2016 to the 2011 NHS, (4) potential integration error, (5) potential misclassification of suicides in the CVSD to avoid stigmatization or as a result of misclassification as an accident, or inability in ascribing a cause, etc., and (6) potentially missing deaths, due to processing delays, in Vital Statistics at the time of data integration. Furthermore, Indigenous identity in the Census is self-reported, which may have led to underestimation or overestimation of suicide rates in some Indigenous groups. Also, 36 Indian reserves and Indian settlements were incompletely enumerated in the 2011 NHS, which could have resulted in under or over-estimation of suicide rates. Most (29) of these reserves were in Québec and Ontario, with the rest in Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia. Among the ones in Québec and Ontario, some are proximal to Census Metropolitan Areas (CMA) while others were rural or remote. The former includes Kahnawake, Kanesatake and Wendake. Mortality rates for small areas and small subgroups of the population may experience substantial year-to-year random fluctuations since death is a relatively rare event, particularly death by suicide. Finally, baseline socioeconomic and demographic factors used in the multivariate analysis may not reflect conditions at the time of death. This may have led to some biases in the findings.

Appendix

﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿ ﻿

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Suicide among First Nations people, Métis and Inuit (2011-2016): Findings from the 2011 Canadian Census Health and Environment Cohort (CanCHEC)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The article presents suicide rates for the 2011-2016 time period among self-identifying First Nations, Métis, Inuit, and non-Indigenous people in private dwellings in Canada. It also explores the influence of socioeconomic factors in the disparity in risk of suicide between First Nations people, Métis, Inuit and non-Indigenous people in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Higher Rates of Suicide - #8 of 8 Key Issues

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about the higher rates of suicide among Indigenous peoples in Canada and the complex factors that contribute to this issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Indigenous Safe Drinking Water Crisis in Canada- overview — The Indigenous Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Importance of Clean Water In 2010, the United Nations General Assembly recognized the basic human rights to water and sanitation, decreeing that everyone has the right to sufficient, continuous, safe, acceptable, physically accessible, and affordable water for personal and domestic use. The Sixth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Indigenous Services Canada has announced it won't end long-term advisories until 2023 at the earliest. In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to ending all long-term drinking water advisories by March 2021. When that deadline passed, the government recommitted to ending long-term advisories without a target date.

This announcement comes as no surprise to many First Nations outraged by the lack of progress on ending drinking water advisories in their communities, and the growing divide and gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities.

Examples of First Nations across Canada enduring persistent drinking water issues are endless. Neskantaga First Nation in Northern Ontario has been on a long-term boil water advisory since 1995. Semiahmoo First Nation recently had a 16-year boil water advisory lifted, after connecting to the nearby Metro Vancouver water line through the city of Surrey, B.C. The community is only a five-minute drive from the city of White Rock.
Read more: Water crisis in First Nations communities runs deeper than long-term drinking water advisories
Internationally, the right to water is recognized by the United Nations. It entitles everyone, without discrimination, access to safe, sufficient, physically accessible and affordable water. In Canada, while our water quality is ranked among the best in the world, First Nations across the country struggle to access a safe supply.

That's why the government's announcement wasn't surprising to those of us who have been following this issue for years. The true crisis is much greater than what is conveyed in the media, and there's a lack of awareness about how water is managed in First Nation communities.

Small systems not under federal jurisdiction

While the federal government is responsible for funding and overseeing water management in First Nations, this does not typically include small systems and individual wells and cisterns. And provincial governments and municipalities have no jurisdiction over water management on reserve.

In addition, the Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act was enacted despite criticism from First Nations.

First Nations face disproportionately higher numbers of drinking water advisories, and are subjected to these advisories for longer periods of time than non-Indigenous people. This is due to inadequate and chronic under-funding, regulatory voids and a lack of resources to support water management. The number of water-borne diseases in First Nations communities is 26 times higher than the national average, and people living on reserve are 90 times more likely to have no access to running water compared to non-Indigenous people in Canada.

At any given moment, there are more than 100 drinking water advisories in place for First Nations across Canada, according to the federal government, the First Nations Health Authority and Saskatoon Tribal Council. But this figure doesn't come close to revealing the real crisis. It is merely the tip of the iceberg.

The pervasiveness of the drinking water crisis is slowly stifling and oppressing First Nations across Canada.

Still no access

It's been 10 years since the federal government's National Assessment on Water and Wastewater Systems in First Nations Communities highlighted the state of water for First Nations people.

The government report estimated that 13.5 per cent of First Nations had trucked-in water, 13 per cent had individual wells and 1.5 per cent had no water service at all. Since the Liberal government announced in 2015 its intention to eliminate long-term drinking water advisories, attention has been placed on federally funded drinking water systems, which are larger community systems.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/John Woods

But many communities, like those in the Prairies or more remote locations, have hundreds of advisories in place for individual wells or cisterns that fail to meet Canadian Drinking Water guidelines. These systems are not well-funded or closely monitored.

In many of these First Nations, water has elevated levels of heavy metals, including iron and manganese, and contaminants like E. coli. Residents don't trust the drinking water and there is a preference to rely on bottled water as a reliable drinking water source. Even Nations near urban centres, like Tsuut'ina Nation just outside of Calgary, struggle to trust the water from their wells.

Taking matters into their own hands

According to Mario Swampy, council member with Samson Cree Nation, residents are dealing with more than 100 drinking water advisories affecting their individual systems. His estimation illustrates how this water crisis is far more serious than national media would suggest.

This has lead to Samson Cree Nation taking matters into its own hands by creating a community-based committee called Nipiy. It brings together community members, leadership, consultants, academics and non-profits to collaboratively work on water management.

Samson Cree Nation Facebook page

Samson Cree Nation, in an attempt to close the existing gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities on safe drinking water, is struggling to adequately address its ongoing boil water advisories that aren't captured in the federal government's commitment.

In December 2020, the government earmarked an additional $1.5 billion to address water management. The recent federal budget committed additional investments to close the infrastructure gap that exists between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. While these investments help, they will not be enough to undo the damage caused by decades of underfunding.
Read more: Federal budget 2021: $18 billion is a step towards closing gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities
First Nations organizations like the Atlantic First Nations Water Authority are moving towards autonomy and control over their water. But more is needed.

What to do

Adequate funding for infrastructure and improvements, operations and maintenance, capacity-building and training that promote building, growth and development are key.

In order for First Nations, including communities like Samson Cree Nation, to achieve equity in water access, quality and quantity, the current model of dependency must be challenged in changed. Full autonomy, decision-making and control over their internationally recognized right to water is the only way forward.

If we really want to close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities on safe drinking water, we need to look across the entire spectrum - from First Nations that rely on bottled water to those with individual wells and communities with reliable tap water. We must address the real magnitude of this crisis.

In 1991, the federal government committed to achieving equality for all in accessing safe water by 2001. Thirty years later, not only have we failed to achieve this, we have also failed to understand just how far from equality we really are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tip of the iceberg: The true state of drinking water advisories in First Nations

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Indigenous Services Canada has announced it won't end long-term advisories until 2023 at the earliest. In 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau committed to ending all long-term drinking water advisories by March 2021. When that deadline passed, the government recommitted to ending long-term advisories without a target date.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Chapter 13 – Half of children in foster care are Indigenous - Vanier

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Vanier Institute of the Family is a national, independent, think tankdedicated to understanding families and family life in Canada.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Government of Canada has co-developed, with Indigenous peoples, provinces and territories, new legislation to reduce the number of Indigenous children and youth in care and improve child and family services.

The Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families came into force on January 1, 2020.

On July 7 the Assembly of First Nations and Government of Canada signed a protocol co-developed by both organizations to establish a new structure to support discussions on the implementation of the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.
Protocol regarding An Act Respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families in relation to the Assembly of First Nations

About the act

Co-developed with Indigenous, provincial and territorial partners, the act:

affirms the rights of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples to exercise jurisdiction over child and family services

establishes national principles such as the best interests of the child, cultural continuity and substantive equality

contributes to the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

provides an opportunity for Indigenous peoples to choose their own solutions for their children and families

On June 21, 2019, the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families became an official law, and on January 1, 2020, its provisions came into force.

What did the act change?

Indigenous groups who wish to do so can design and deliver child and family services solutions that best suit their needs. Just as the act was co-developed with our partners, we will continue to work with them through the transition and implementation phases of the act.

As of January 1, 2020:

Indigenous groups who have developed their own legislation will have 2 options to exercise jurisdiction under the act.

Every service provider delivering child and family services to Indigenous children and families will need to follow the minimum standards found in the act.

Existing agencies will continue to provide services to Indigenous children.

Agreements related to existing delegated agencies will remain valid unless the parties decide otherwise.

Indigenous groups that choose to exercise their jurisdiction could continue working with delegated agencies or could create their own delivery service models.

The act provides that agreements such as treaties and self-government agreements in relation to child and family services between Indigenous groups and federal, provincial, or territorial governments that predate the coming-into-force of the act prevail in case of conflict.

To facilitate the work of those providing child and family services, information will be posted on the Indigenous Services Canada (ISC) website related to notices of intent, coordination agreements and Indigenous laws as they are made available: Notices and requests related to An Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families.

ISC will continue to work with Indigenous groups who wish to exercise their jurisdiction as they decide which option they prefer to use.

To access a list of service providers consult the First Nations Child and Family Services interactive map.

The Repository for notices under section 12 lists contact information for Indigenous governing bodies who have informed ISC directly that they are authorized by an Indigenous group, community or people to receive notice from service providers.

Information on Canada's approach concerning the implementation of the act is currently being updated following feedback received from partners. Please contact us if you have any questions or concerns.

Co-development of federal legislation on Indigenous child and family services

During the summer and fall of 2018, the Government of Canada engaged with national, regional and community organizations representing First Nations, Inuit and Métis as well as Treaty Nations, self-governing First Nations and Inuit, provinces and territories, experts and people with lived experience, including Elders, youth and women. 65 engagement sessions were held across the country, with nearly 2,000 participants. These sessions were part of the co-development of legislation that contributes to comprehensive reform of Indigenous child and family services.

Indigenous children in foster care

In Canada, 53.8% of children in foster care are Indigenous, but account for only 7.7% of the child population according to Census 2021.

Results from the 2011 National Household Survey also show that 38% of Indigenous children in Canada live in poverty, compared to 7% for non-Indigenous children.

If you need more information in relation to the Act respecting First Nations, Inuit and Métis children, youth and families, please contact:

Please note that the phone lines and mailbox are not monitored outside of regular business hours. ISC cannot address specific child and family services delivery concerns, including concerns with service providers. Do not send personal information pertaining to specific service delivery matters.

If you have concerns or inquiries about the safety or well-being of a child, contact the appropriate authorities within your provincial or territorial jurisdiction.

Related links

Thank you for your feedback

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Reducing the number of Indigenous children in care

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We are making progress on the 6 points of action, including engaging with Indigenous partners on the co-development of potential federal legislation on Indigenous child and family services.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2024, the majority of First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Métis (70%) and Inuit (82%) reported that it was very or somewhat important to have health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices.

Released today, new data from the Survey Series on First Nations People, Métis and Inuit sheds light on health care access and experiences among Indigenous people aged 15 and older. The purpose of this survey series is to improve the visibility of First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit in national statistics and to fill key data gaps with timely and culturally relevant data.

Over one-quarter of Indigenous people wait two weeks or more for non-urgent care with a health care provider

Primary health care providers serve a crucial role in health maintenance and are linked to better health outcomes. In 2024, 70% of Métis, 66% of First Nations people living off reserve, and 52% of Inuit consulted a health care provider for a non-urgent primary health care need (such as check-ups and prescription refills) in the 12 months prior to the survey.

Timely access to a primary health care provider is important, yet wait times have been increasing in Canada and they tend to be longer in more remote areas among Indigenous people. Among those who had consulted a primary health care provider in the 12 months prior to the survey, most reported wait times that ranged from two days to less than two weeks. Inuit were most likely to report waiting one month or more to access a primary health care provider (18%, compared with 14% for First Nations people living off reserve and 11% of Métis) (Chart 1).

When asked about their level of satisfaction with wait times, about half of First Nations people living off reserve (50%), Métis (52%) and Inuit (57%) reported being satisfied or very satisfied.

Over one-quarter of Indigenous people have unmet health care needs

Indigenous people often face barriers to health care that contribute to health disparities, including navigating complex health care policies and funding, and sometimes even having to travel outside their communities to access services.

Unmet health care needs in the 12 months prior to the survey were reported by 32% of First Nations people living off reserve, 30% of Métis, and 29% of Inuit. A higher percentage of off-reserve First Nations women than men reported unmet health care needs in the 12 months prior to the survey (Table 1).

When asked why their health care needs were unmet, commonly reported reasons among First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit were difficulty getting a referral to a specialist and not being given the correct treatment or prescription. Among First Nations people living off reserve and Inuit, another commonly reported reason was health care services not being in their area/being too far away (Table 2).

Among Indigenous people who need mental health care and seek such care, about three-quarters report needs that are partially met or unmet

Mental health disparities among Indigenous people have been widely reported. These disparities are rooted in historical factors such as colonial, assimilationist policies, that have had adverse direct and intergenerational impacts, as well as contemporary factors such as access barriers to mental health services.

Almost half (47%) of First Nations people living off reserve, 43% of Métis and 35% of Inuit reported needing mental health care in the 12 months prior to the survey. More First Nations, Métis, and Inuit women than men reported that they needed mental health care. The need for mental health care trended higher among younger than older First Nations people living off reserve, Métis and Inuit with significant differences found between the oldest and youngest age groups (Table 3).

Among those who needed mental health care and sought such care, 28% of First Nations people living off reserve, 23% of Métis and 22% of Inuit reported that their needs were fully met, while nearly three-quarters reported partially met or unmet mental health care needs.

Inuit report travelling significant distances from their community to access health care

For some Indigenous people, extensive travel is necessary to access health care, and this can result in financial burdens, emotional stress, anxiety, and feelings of isolation. Roughly one in five First Nations people living off reserve (18%), 16% of Metis and 40% of Inuit travelled outside their community to access health care services in the 12 months prior to the survey.

While most First Nations people living off reserve and Métis who travelled for health care in the 12 months prior to the survey reported travelling less than 500 km (55% and 63%, respectively), a different scenario was seen among Inuit, just over half of whom reported travelling 1,500 km or more (Table 4).

Roughly one in five Indigenous people report experiencing unfair treatment, racism or discrimination from a health care professional

Racism, discrimination, and marginalization within the health care system are documented barriers to health care for Indigenous people. About 24% of First Nations people living off reserve, 23% of Inuit and 18% of Métis reported that they experienced some form of unfair treatment, racism, or discrimination from a health care professional in the 12 months prior to the survey. First Nations women living off reserve and Métis women were nearly twice as likely to report this compared to men (Chart 2).

Among First Nations people living off reserve and Inuit who had experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination from a health care professional, the most reported setting was the hospital emergency room (50% for First Nations people living off reserve and 34% for Inuit), with 36% of Métis also reporting similar experiences in this setting. Among Métis, the most reported setting was the doctor's office (46%) (Table 5).

Most Indigenous people report that having health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices are very or somewhat important

In the Indigenous context, the integration of culturally appropriate and safe care-defined as care that reflects the values, traditions, and social norms of a patient's culture and where patients feel respected, safe and valued-is important. In addition, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada called on the Canadian health care system to recognize and integrate traditional knowledge, therapies and healing practices into the treatment approach for Indigenous people.

In 2024, health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices in the Canadian health care system were very or somewhat important to First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Inuit (82%) and Métis (70%) (Chart 3).

However, most Indigenous people experiencing unfair treatment, racism or discrimination felt that their concerns and values were not taken into consideration in their interactions with health care professionals. More specifically, among those who experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination in the 12 months preceding the survey, 67% of First Nations people living off reserve, 65% of Métis and 58% of Inuit reported that their health concerns were minimized or dismissed (Table 6).

A further 21% of First Nations people living off reserve, 12% of Métis and 9% of Inuit indicated that their cultural protocols were not respected (e.g., not allowed to smudge or use traditional medicines).

Of those who stated that culturally appropriate services were important, 68% of First Nations people living off reserve, 67% of Inuit and 61% of Métis reported such services would make them feel respected for their culture, beliefs and identity. Roughly half of First Nations people living off reserve (49%) and Inuit (50%) reported that such services would make them more likely to seek health care. About half of Inuit (48%), 41% of First Nations people living off reserve and 32% of Métis reported that these services would make them feel safer discussing sensitive or traumatic experiences (Table 7).

Did you know we have a mobile app?

Download our mobile app and get timely access to data at your fingertips! The StatsCAN app is available for free on the App Store and on Google Play.

Contact information

For more information, or to enquire about the concepts, methods or data quality of this release, contact us (toll-free 1-800-263-1136; 514-283-8300; infostats@statcan.gc.ca) or Media Relations ( statcan.mediahotline-ligneinfomedias.statcan@statcan.gc.ca).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Daily — Health care access and experiences among Indigenous people, 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2024, the majority of First Nations people living off reserve (86%), Métis (70%) and Inuit (82%) reported that it was very or somewhat important to have health care services that support Indigenous traditional medicines, healing and wellness practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Access to primary health care services for Indigenous peoples: A framework synthesis - International Journal for Equity in Health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Background Indigenous peoples often find it difficult to access appropriate mainstream primary health care services. Securing access to primary health care services requires more than just services that are situated within easy reach. Ensuring the accessibility of health care for Indigenous peoples who are often faced with a vast array of additional barriers including experiences of discrimination and racism, can be complex. This framework synthesis aimed to identify issues that hindered Indigenous peoples from accessing primary health care and then explore how, if at all, these were addressed by Indigenous health care services. Methods To be included in this framework synthesis papers must have presented findings focused on access to (factors relating to Indigenous peoples, their families and their communities) or accessibility of Indigenous primary health care services. Findings were imported into NVivo and a framework analysis undertaken whereby findings were coded to and then thematically analysed using Levesque and colleague’s accessibility framework. Results Issues relating to the cultural and social determinants of health such as unemployment and low levels of education influenced whether Indigenous patients, their families and communities were able to access health care. Indigenous health care services addressed these issues in a number of ways including the provision of transport to and from appointments, a reduction in health care costs for people on low incomes and close consultation with, if not the direct involvement of, community members in identifying and then addressing health care needs. Conclusions Indigenous health care services appear to be best placed to overcome both the social and cultural determinants of health which hamper Indigenous peoples from accessing health care. Findings of this synthesis also suggest that Levesque and colleague’s accessibility framework should be broadened to include factors related to the health care system such as funding.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous peoples in Canada, findings from the 2021 Census - Indigenous Watchdog

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Overview of the study Statistics Canada:This study uses data from the 2021 Census to report on postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous adults aged 25 to 64 years.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous peoples in Canada, findings from the 2021 Census

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This study uses data from the 2021 Census to report on postsecondary educational attainment and labour market outcomes among Indigenous adults aged 25 to 64 years. As First Nations people, Métis and Inuit are more likely to live in certain regions, which can impact their participation in both education and the labour market, the article pays particular attention to patterns in educational attainment and employment among those residing in remote areas, on reserve, and communities across Inuit Nunangat.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Health care disparities are often caused by obstacles that Indigenous people must overcome, such as navigating complicated financial and policy frameworks and maybe even having to leave their communities to receive services.

2. nearly three-quarters of the indigenous people reported partially met or unmet mental health care needs.

3. Access to health care for Indigenous patients, their families, and communities was impacted by cultural and social determinants of health, including low educational attainment and unemployment.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
by Marta Burczycka and Adam Cotter

Release date: October 4, 2023

On this page
Start of text box
Highlights
End of text box
Introduction

In Canada, Indigenous women and girls continue to experience many forms of violence at higher rates than their non-Indigenous counterparts-including homicide, the most extreme form of violence ( Miladinovic & Mulligan, 2015; David & Jaffray, 2022; Perreault, 2022). Indigenous peoples and their advocates have long drawn attention to the disproportionate rate of violence experienced by First Nations, Métis and Inuit women and girls, and have pointed to its roots in colonialism and forced assimilation; more recently, national and international organizations have amplified these voices to denounce the intergenerational trauma and socioeconomic marginalization created by these policies ( Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and 2SLGBTQQIA+ People National Action Plan, 2021; National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, 2019; Native Women's Association of Canada, 2010; Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015; Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination of Women, 2015). As is the case in many communities who struggle with poor mental and physical health, poverty, addictions and discrimination, women and girls are often subjected to their worst consequences, including extreme violence ( David & Jaffray, 2022; Heidinger, 2022a; Heidinger, 2022b; Sutton, 2023).

The over-representation of Indigenous peoples as both victims and people accused of crimes, as well as issues related to accessing justice, are interwoven into the courts process. Pathways through the Canadian criminal courts can be complex, starting where police investigations end and culminating with a decision and sentence. Along the way, decisions are made about the charges seen in court, the disposition of those charges, and any potential verdicts and sentences passed down. Using data from the Homicide Survey and the Integrated Criminal Court Survey, this Juristat article examines how homicides of Indigenous women and girls moved through the court system between 2009 and 2021, how they were treated at crucial decision points along the way, and how their outcomes compared to homicides of victims who were non-Indigenous. While the linked data used for this analysis provide important information with which to contextualize court outcomes of homicides of Indigenous women and girls, they are not without their limitations. For more information, please see Data sources and methodology.

While a distinctions-based approach-that is, an approach that allows for cases involving First Nations, Métis and Inuit women and girls to be considered separately-is ideal, the relatively small number of individual victims belonging to these groups means that in most cases, a pan-Indigenous approach to the analysis is taken. Additionally, throughout this article the main comparator group to Indigenous women and girls is non-Indigenous women and girls. For readability, the terms "Indigenous victims" and "non-Indigenous victims" are often used, without making reference to victims' gender. Unless otherwise noted, these terms refer to the women and girls within these groups.

Section 1: Homicides of Indigenous women and girls

Homicide rates for Indigenous women and girls are six times higher than for their non-Indigenous counterparts

Between 2009 and 2021, 490 Indigenous women and girls were the victims of homicide. This translated into a rate of 4.27 Indigenous women and girls killed per 100,000 Indigenous women and girls in the population-a rate that was six times higher than for their non-Indigenous counterparts (0.73). While Indigenous women and girls made up between 2% and 3% of the Canadian population during this time, they represented between 5% and 7% of homicide victims ( Table 1). The overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples, and Indigenous women and girls in particular, as victims of homicide and other violent crimes in Canada is well-documented (see Text box 1).

Among the 490 Indigenous women and girls killed between 2009 and 2021, 60% were First Nations, 8% were Inuit, and 7% were Métis. For 24% of victims, police either did not know the Indigenous group to which victims belonged or did not report that information to Statistics Canada ( Table 2).

The rate of homicide against Indigenous women and girls varied from year to year, ranging from a low of 3.28 per 100,000 in 2016 to a high of 5.15 in 2009. Each year, the rate of Indigenous women and girls killed was higher than the rates of non-Indigenous women and girls, and of men and boysNote ( Table 1).

Start of text box 1

Text box 1
Victimization of Indigenous women and girls in Canada

End of text box 1

Nine in ten homicides of Indigenous women and girls from 2009 to 2021 were solved

The majority (87%) of homicides involving Indigenous women and girls reported by police between 2009 and 2021 were cleared (solved)-that is, an accused person was identified in relation to the case ( Table 2). This proportion was slightly lower than in homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls (90%).

While 13% of homicides of Indigenous women and girls-representing 65 victims-remained unsolved at the time of the present study, the proportion varied between Indigenous identity groups. Among First Nations women and girls specifically, 12% of homicides remained unsolved; this was also the case for 23% of homicides of Métis women and girls, 5% of homicides of Inuit women and girls and 16% of homicides of Indigenous women and girls whose distinction was unknown to police or not reported by them. It should be noted that homicide investigations can be complex and lengthy; thus, for some victims, the homicide may be noted as unsolved because the investigation is ongoing. Notably, when it came to the most recent homicides included in the study-those reported by police in 2021-higher proportions remained unsolved, including 29% where the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl and 17% where the victim was non-Indigenous.

Data from 2015 to 2021Note show that unsolved homicides involving Indigenous women and girls more often involved a victim who had been reported missing at the time of her death (32%) than who had not (13%). Similarly, homicides of Indigenous women and girls were more often unsolved when the cause of death was unknown or not stated by police (66%). Police may choose not to report some facts of a homicide to the Homicide Survey if the investigation is ongoing.

It should be noted that many Indigenous peoples and the organizations which advocate for them describe the difficulties encountered by Indigenous survivors and victims' families in their interactions with police ( Native Women's Association of Canada, 2010; National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, 2019). These difficulties can manifest as barriers to the kind of information sharing that is necessary for police investigations and can lead to homicides remaining unsolved for longer periods of time.

Most often, the person accused of the homicides was also Indigenous

Research has shown that most women and girls-regardless of their ethnicity or Indigenous identity-are killed by an intimate partner, family member or someone they know ( David & Jaffray, 2022). As such, their killers are often part of their community and thus may be people with whom they share cultural and other commonalities. Overall, eight in ten (81%) Indigenous women and girls were killed by someone they knew, most often an acquaintance (24%), a spouse (23%) or a family member (22%) ( Table 2).Note Most solved homicides of Indigenous women and girls involved an accused person who was also Indigenous. Specifically, between 2014 to 2021Note , eight in ten (86%) persons accused of killing an Indigenous woman or girl were themselves Indigenous; when the victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl, more than nine in ten (94%) persons accused were also non-Indigenous ( Table 3). Many observers have noted that early exposure to family violence, family breakdown due to residential schools and forced apprehension of Indigenous children, and other factors related to colonialism are related to violence within Indigenous communities ( Clark, 2019; Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015).

The Indigenous identity of those accused of the homicides of Indigenous women and girls is noteworthy for several reasons, including the implications for how those offenders are treated in the justice system (see Text box 2). For the present study, which aims to examine court outcomes of cases linked to Indigenous victims, offenders' pathways through the justice system are particularly relevant. In Canada, Indigenous people are overrepresented among those accused of crime and those who are incarcerated ( Department of Justice 2016; Robinson et al., 2023; Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015), and advocates and government have sought to better understand and address this disparity.

8 in 10 homicides of Indigenous women and girls result in police laying or recommending homicide charges

When police become aware of a homicide, the most common outcome is the laying or recommendation of a charge. When the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl, it was more likely that charges would be laid or recommended in relation to the case. Charges were laid or recommended by police in the majority (79%) of the 490 homicides of Indigenous women and girls which occurred between 2009 and 2021, including 81% of homicides where the victim was First Nations, 71% where she was Métis, 79% where she was Inuit, and 77% where her Indigenous identity group was unknown ( Table 2). In contrast, a smaller proportion (71%) of homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls were cleared with the laying of a charge.

Start of text box 2

Text box 2
Overrepresentation of Indigenous peoples in the Canadian justice system

End of text box 2

Fewer homicides of Indigenous women and girls considered by police to be first-degree murder

The definitions of both first- and second-degree murder require that the accused person either intended to cause the death of the victim or intended to cause injuries that he or she knew would likely cause the victim to die, in situations where there is culpability ( e.g., the death is not accidental or in self-defence; Wilson, 2010). First-degree murder differs from second-degree mainly in that first-degree murder is planned and deliberate, and also applies in specific situations outlined in the Canadian Criminal Code (for example, when a murder occurs during a sexual assault).Note The definition of manslaughter, meanwhile, is more difficult to pin down: according to the Criminal Code, "culpable homicide that is not murder or infanticide is manslaughter."Note

Police who investigate homicides determine what the most serious violation (MSV) was in the incident-for example, whether the MSV was first-degree murder, second-degree murder, or manslaughter. Police-reported data show that overall, homicides of Indigenous women and girls tended to be classified by police as having relatively less serious violations (less serious MSVs), compared to homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls. Specifically, first-degree murder-the most serious type of homicide-was considered to be the MSV half as often when the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl (27%) than when she was non-Indigenous (54%) ( Table 4). Instead, second-degree murder was the most common MSV when the victim was Indigenous (60%) and less so when she was not (39%). Further, an MSV of manslaughter was also more common in homicides of Indigenous women and girls (13%) compared to non-Indigenous victims (7%).

First-degree murder charges least common when victim, accused both Indigenous

The ways in which decisions about charges are made vary across jurisdictions in Canada. Much of this variation is at the local, provincial or territorial level, and has to do with which entity-the police or the Crown prosecution-decides which charges are pursued in homicide cases. In most jurisdictions, varying degrees of input from Crown prosecutors influence what charges are ultimately laid by police.Note

The severity of charges laid or recommended by police in homicides of Indigenous women and girls appears to correlate with the Indigenous identity of both the victim and the person accused of the crime. Looking at police-reported data covering 2014 to 2021, first-degree murder charges were most common when both the victim and the accused were non-Indigenous (44%) and least common when both were Indigenous (18%) (Chart 1). Notably, first-degree murder charges in homicides of Indigenous women and girls were laid or recommended more often when the accused was a non-Indigenous person (35%, versus 18% when the accused was Indigenous).

Manslaughter charges were more common in homicides of women and girls where the accused was Indigenous, regardless of the Indigenous identity of the victim. In homicides with an Indigenous accused, 17% where the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl and 16% where she was non-Indigenous resulted in a manslaughter charge being laid or recommended. When the accused was not Indigenous, these proportions were 10% and 9%, respectively.

Chart 1 start

Data table for Chart 1
﻿

First-degree murder

Second-degree murder

Manslaughter

percent

Chart 1 end

Indigenous identity of the victim increases the odds of manslaughter charge being laid

To help identify factors which may increase or decrease the odds of an accused person being charged with manslaughter as opposed to first- or second-degree murder, a multivariate analysis was conducted ( Table 5).Note Various characteristics of victims, accused persons and incidents of police-reported homicides occurring between 2014 and 2021 were entered into a model to see if any one factor independently increased or decreased the odds of a manslaughter charge being laid or recommended by police.

The results of this analysis found that the victim's being Indigenous increased the odds of a manslaughter charge being laid by police, as opposed to a charge of murder. Even when other relevant factors related to the homicide were considered-including victims' gender, the Indigenous identity of the accused, and their relationship-the odds that police laid or recommended a manslaughter charge as opposed to first- or second-degree murder increased by 1.5 times when the victim was Indigenous.

Other factors were also identified as having independent associations with higher odds of a manslaughter charge: a cause of death that was anything other than shooting or stabbing (7.3 times the odds), the accused person having committed another, related, offence in conjunction with the homicide (1.5 times), and an argument or quarrel being the reported motive behind the crime (1.3 times). These factors may be related to a lack of premeditation and intention, which are associated with first- and second-degree murder but not with manslaughter.

The Indigenous identity of the accused did not impact the odds of a manslaughter charge versus first- or second-degree murder being laid or recommended by police. The same was true with respect to whether the victim and the accused had a family or intimate relationship, whether the accused was intoxicated at the time of the crime, or whether the accused was involved in illegal activities when the homicide occurred.

It should be noted that police-reported information about some aspects of homicides rely on the perceptions and interpretations of police officers and others involved in the justice system. Critics have suggested that systemic biases pervade the Canadian justice system, including at the policing level, which particularly affect Indigenous people and are rooted in racist stereotypes ( Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015).

Homicides cleared through something other than a charge more common with non-Indigenous victims

In some cases, a homicide is considered solved, but no charges are laid against an accused. For instance, the accused may be deceased, whether from suicide or other causes, or may have been committed to a mental health facility and be unable to stand trial. These incidents are considered "cleared otherwise", and as such will never enter the criminal courts system.

Notably, between 2009 and 2021, homicides that were cleared otherwise were markedly more common when the victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl than when she was Indigenous. Overall, 19% of all homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls were cleared this way, compared to 7% of homicides of Indigenous women and girls ( Table 2). In other words, homicides of Indigenous women and girls were more likely to proceed to court, at least in terms of whether their homicide was cleared by charge or cleared otherwise.

Homicides in which the accused person commits suicide are more common in situations of intimate partner or family violence ( Brennan & Boyce, 2013). Overall, 57% of homicides against Indigenous women and girls were committed by a current or former spouse or intimate partner or family member-a lower proportion than among non-Indigenous women and girls (64%; Table 2). Since the death of the accused is more common with intimate partner and family homicide, this difference may help to explain why clearance by means other than a charge is more common when the victim was non-Indigenous. However, homicides being cleared otherwise are less common for Indigenous victims even within these relationship categories: for instance, 18% of homicides where an Indigenous woman was killed by her spouse were cleared otherwise, compared to 34% of spousal homicides where the victim was non-Indigenous ( Table 2). This pattern was consistent for homicides committed by a current or former intimate partner (9% for Indigenous victims versus 18% for their non-Indigenous counterparts) and homicides committed by family members (6% versus 17%).

Section 2: Court charges linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls

Explaining the linkage and selecting the unit of analysis

To understand how charges related to the homicides of Indigenous women and girls are processed within the Canadian criminal court system, police-reported data from the Homicide Survey were linked with data from the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey and the Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS) to allow for the analysis of how incidents moved through the court system.

Homicides reported by police between 2009 and 2021, where there was at least one accused person identified, and charges were laid or recommended by police, were considered in scope and were linked to the ICCS data files for the fiscal years 2009/2010 through to 2020/21.Note Homicides that were uncleared (unsolved) and homicides where an accused was identified but no charges were laid (cleared otherwise) were excluded from the study as these incidents did not move to court.

Using these criteria, there were 389 Indigenous women and girls who were victims of homicide between 2009 and 2021 where police laid or recommended charges against at least one accused person included in this analysis. Of these, 185 victims of homicide incidents (48%) successfully linked to at least one charge in court. This linkage rate is comparable to what was seen for non-Indigenous women and girls (512 of 1,156, or 44%) (Figure 1). Some incidents that did not successfully link to a completed charge may still be before the courts, particularly in recent years where the linkage rates were noticeably lower.Note

Figure 1 start

Data table for Figure 1
﻿

Progression through the criminal justice system

Homicides of Indigenous women and girls

Homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls

number

percent

number

percent

490

Note ...: not applicable

1,633

Note ...: not applicable

193

Note ...: not applicable

503

Note ...: not applicable

Figure 1 end

Given that the focus of analysis is on the processing and outcomes criminal court cases associated with incidents of homicide, the primary units of analyses in the next two sections focus on charges ( Section 2) and cases ( Section 3) linked to homicides.Note Note Cases and charges can link to multiple incidents or victims if they are processed by the courts within a single case. This means that in some instances, particularly when there were multiple accused persons, the same victim or incident may be counted more than once in this analysis if there was more than one case associated with their homicide.Note However, this approach emphasizes the characteristics and contexts of each case to provide an overview of the decisions and sentencing outcomes related to the homicides of Indigenous women and girls in Canada.

Manslaughter charges in Canadian criminal courts more common when victim was Indigenous

Between 2009 and 2021, there were 193 completed court cases in Canada that were linked to the homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl, including 601 individual criminal charges. These charges ranged from first degree murder to property crimes and crimes against the administration of justice. Among these, 221 or 37% were homicide charges; specifically, 22% were charges of first- or second-degree murder and 15% were manslaughter. There were no charges of infanticide ( Table 6). There were more homicide charges than there were individual victims as some homicides involved multiple accused persons, each of whom would have been charged individually; additionally, Crown prosecutors can elect to lay multiple, different homicide charges ( e.g., second-degree murder and manslaughter) in relation to the same one homicide victim.

Notably, charges of first- or second-degree murder were less common in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls than in cases where the victim was not Indigenous ( Table 6). Of homicide charges specifically, 59% of charges in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls were for first- or second-degree murder-a considerably smaller proportion than when the victim was non-Indigenous (80%). Instead, manslaughter charges were twice as common the court level when the victims were Indigenous women and girls (41%), compared to when they were not (20%).

In a general way, the distribution of first-degree murder, second-degree murder and manslaughter charges seen at the courts level mirrors that of charges laid or recommended by police (see Section 1): at both the police-reported and court charge level, more serious homicide charges were more common when the victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl. As discussed in Section 1, police and Crown prosecution take various factors into account when deciding on the specific type of homicide charge to pursue.

Interestingly, the proportion of manslaughter charges increased between the police and courts stages of data, relative to first- and second-degree murder charges. This may be indicative of plea arrangements, where accused persons originally charged with second degree murder by police agree to plead guilty to the lesser charge of manslaughter. Observers have pointed out that there may be a tendency among Indigenous accused persons in particular to accept guilty pleas, for reasons including mistrust in the justice process or to access supports that are contingent on doing so ( Bressan & Coady, 2017; Clark, 2016; Rudin, 2009). According to police-reported data, 86% of those accused of killing and Indigenous woman or girl between 2014 and 2021 were themselves Indigenous ( Table 3).

In terms of charges seen in court, the difference in the proportions of murder versus manslaughter charges was the most notable difference between charges seen in homicides of Indigenous women and girls and those involving non-Indigenous victims. Other marked differences included aggravated physical assault (present in 6% of cases linked to Indigenous victims and 2% of cases linked to non-Indigenous victims), breach of probation (8% and 2%) and failure to comply with an order (8% and 5%). Conversely, weapon possession charges were more common when the homicide victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl (9%) than when she was Indigenous (4%).

Guilty findings most common when charge is manslaughter

Looking at the totality of all charges laid in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls, the proportion of charges for which a guilty finding was pronounced was similar when the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl and when she was not. Under a third (31%) of all charges (homicide and other charges) in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls resulted in a guilty finding for the accused, along with 29% of cases where the victim was non-Indigenous ( Table 7).

Guilty findings specific to the homicide charges associated with the cases were also similar. Of the 221 homicide charges present in the cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls, 45% returned a guilty finding. Acquittals were rare: about one in one hundred (1.6%) homicide charges in cases where the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl resulted in an acquittal; in cases where the victim was non-Indigenous, the proportion was 0.4%. Instead, stays, and withdrawals and dismissals, were much more common, accounting for 49% of homicide charges linked to cases involving the homicides of Indigenous women and girls and 45% of charges where the victim was non-Indigenous.

Notably, the similarity in rates of guilty findings between homicide charges linked to Indigenous woman and girl victims and those that did not involve an Indigenous victim rests on manslaughter charges. Manslaughter charges-which were considerably more common when the victim was Indigenous-had the highest rate of guilty findings of any criminal charge, in cases where the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl (66%) and when she was not (72%). Guilty rates for manslaughter were somewhat lower among Indigenous victims, as they were for first- and second-degree murder (30% versus 36%); however, the larger proportion of manslaughter charges-and their high rates of guilty findings-found in cases linked to Indigenous victims inflated the overall rate of guilty findings among charges linked to Indigenous victims, making it comparable to that of non-Indigenous victims.

Pre-trial negotiations may explain some of the difference in rates of guilty findings. Guilty pleas are counted as convictions in the courts data; thus, charges with a higher proportion of guilty pleas may also have a higher rate of conviction. In this way, the high rate of guilty findings for manslaughter charges may reflect pre-trial negotiations in which an accused pleads guilty to manslaughter instead of standing trial for first- or second-degree murder. As discussed, manslaughter charges are more common among Indigenous accused persons and when linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls.

Section 3: Court cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls

The 601 individual charges linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls that were completed in court between 2009 and 2021 are distributed among 193 individual court cases. Case-level analysis provides the opportunity to examine different aspects of how homicides of Indigenous women and girls are treated by the criminal courts. It is fundamentally different from charge-level analysis, presented in Section 2: while analysis at the charge level provides details about individual charges (of which there may be several in a single case), case-level analysis provides information about the totality of the case. For this reason, percentages seen at the charge level (for example, percentage of charges with a guilty finding) may be different than those seen at the case level. For more information on charges and cases, see Data sources and methodology.

Though all 193 cases included in this study were linked to a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl, in some cases no charge of homicide was completed in the case. Specifically, 150 of the 193 cases that linked to homicide victims included a charge of homicide, while 43 did not. Different factors may account for the fact that there were fewer cases with a homicide charge completed in court than there were cases that linked to police-reported incidents of homicide, including prosecutorial or judicial discretion to downgrade charges, pre-trial proceedings or data quality issues associated with the linkage. Of note, the rate of retention of homicide charges in these cases was 78% when the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl and 88% when she was non-Indigenous. Unless otherwise noted, the remainder of the analysis in this study will include those 150 cases that included a homicide charge. These 150 cases that linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls involved the homicides of 169 individual victims.Note

Almost 7 in 10 cases linked to a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl result in a guilty finding

Police collect a variety of information about victims of homicide, including demographics, the relationship between the victim and the offender, and the method used to cause the victim's death. Among Indigenous women and girls who were killed, 62% were First Nations, 7% were Inuit, 5% were Métis, and 23% were of an Indigenous identity group that was either unknown or unreported by police ( Table 8). The overall proportion of Indigenous victims for whom cases resulted in a finding of guilt was 65%.Note Note In comparison, in cases linked to homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls, 57% returned a guilty finding.

The rate of findings of guilt in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls were higher when the accused person was not Indigenous. In a subset of cases completed between 2014 and 2021,Note almost nine in ten (88%) cases with a non-Indigenous accused linked to a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl resulted in a guilty finding ( Table 9). When the accused was an Indigenous person, 59% of cases returned a finding of guilt.

High rate of guilty findings in cases linked to Indigenous women killed by a spouses or strangers

Similar proportions of homicide cases involved women who were killed by a spouse or intimate partner, whether they were Indigenous (33%) or not (37%) ( Table 8). Interestingly, guilty findings in cases linked to Indigenous victims were returned considerably more often when the accused was a spouse (82%) then when they were a non-spousal intimate partner (57%); this was not the case when victim was non-Indigenous (63% versus 70%, respectively).

About one-quarter of cases linked to homicides of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous women and girls involved a family member other than a spouse as the accused (24%, respectively). Conviction rates were also similar (59% and 54%) in cases linked to familial homicides of Indigenous and non-Indigenous women and girls.

It was somewhat more common for an acquaintance to be accused in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls (35%) than in those linked to non-Indigenous victims (28%). Meanwhile, strangers were more common when the victim was non-Indigenous (12%, versus 8% when the victim was Indigenous). However, findings of guilt were fairly high in cases of stranger homicides of Indigenous women or girls (79%) and fairly low when victims were non-Indigenous (46%).

Prior convictions more common for accused in homicide cases linked to Indigenous women and girls

Guilty findings in cases linked to the homicides of Indigenous women and girls were somewhat less likely if the accused had previously been convicted of a crime (63%) than if they had not (70%) ( Table 10). The opposite was true when the victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl (65% versus 50%). Almost three-quarters (72%) of those accused in cases linked to the homicides of Indigenous women and girls had a previous criminal conviction, according to police. In cases linked to non-Indigenous victims, this proportion was considerably lower (44%).

Interestingly, current involvement in illegal activity such as gangs or drug dealing appeared to have the opposite association. Those with criminal involvement were found guilty less often, regardless of if the case was linked to an Indigenous (57%) or non-Indigenous (44%) woman or girl, than those without criminal involvement (67% and 58%) ( Table 10). Accused persons linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls were also somewhat more likely to be described by police as having involvement in criminal activity (for example, gangs, drug dealing or human trafficking; 13%) compared to those linked to homicides of non-Indigenous victims (9.5%).

Accused in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls were more often using intoxicants

A notable difference was found between accused in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls and those linked to cases with non-Indigenous women and girls when it came to the use of alcohol, drugs, and other intoxicating substances (for example, inhalants). Seven in ten (69%) persons accused in cases where the homicide victim was an Indigenous woman or girl were reported by police as having consumed alcohol or another intoxicating substance at the time of the incident; among those accused in cases linked to non-Indigenous victims, the proportion was 41%.Note Intoxication can be taken into consideration by Crown counsel when deciding to accept a guilty plea to manslaughter by an accused initially charged with murder ( Wilson, 2010).

When an accused was reported to have used alcohol or another intoxicant, 68% of cases linked to the homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl resulted in a finding of guilt. This was very similar to the proportion of guilty findings in cases linked to non-Indigenous women and girls who were killed (65%).

Argument or quarrel more common as motive in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls

When it came to motives for homicide, notable differences were seen when it came to the two most common motives reported by police: argument or quarrel, and frustration, anger or despair ( Table 11). In cases linked to Indigenous women and girls who were killed, an argument or quarrel was the most common motive reported by police (49%); this motive type was substantially less common when the homicide involved a non-Indigenous victim (25%).Conversely, frustration, anger or despair-the second-most common motive in cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls (19%)-was more common when the victim was non-Indigenous (28%).

According to the Criminal Code, acts that would otherwise be considered murder can be reduced to manslaughter if the accused acted in the heat of passion cause by sudden provocation; provocation, in turn, exists if the victim's action amounted to an indictable offence punishable by five years or more of imprisonment and that would have caused an ordinary person to lose self-control (Criminal Code, s. 232 (1), s. 232 (2), s. 232 (3)(a)(b)). An argument that took the form of a physical altercation, in which the victim committed a fairly serious assault on the accused, could represent such a situation.

Average sentence for homicide is shorter when the victim is an Indigenous woman or girl

Where a charge of homicide processed in adult court returned a finding of guilt, the majority of cases linked to a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl concluded with the accused being sentenced to custody (91%) ( Table 12). This was slightly lower than guilty cases involving a non-Indigenous victim, of which 94% produced a custodial sentence. It should be noted that this excludes cases for which sentencing information was not available: 18% of cases with guilty findings which linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls, and 30% of such cases where the victim was not Indigenous.

In cases with a guilty finding on a homicide charge where an accused was sentenced to custody and the length of the custody was known and greater than 0 days,Note the average length of custody when the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl was 11.4 years ( Table 13).Note This was three years shorter, on average, than when she was non-Indigenous (14.4 years). The median length of sentence, which attempts to take into account the "outlier" sentences that were either exceptionally long or exceptionally short, was 5.6 years in cases linked to Indigenous victims-somewhat shorter than the 7.9 years in cases linked to their non-Indigenous counterparts.

Cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls completed in average of 531 days

Homicide cases seen in court are often complex and can take many weeks from start to finish, and have a longer duration than other offences processed in criminal court ( Karam et al., 2020). Various factors contribute to the length of a court process, including complexity of the evidence and trial procedures, number of witnesses and justice system resources.

When it came to the 193 court cases completed between 2009 and 2021 that linked to a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl, the average length of time that it took for a case to be completed was 531 days ( Table 13).Note The median duration was 433 days. Cases that resulted in a guilty finding took longer to complete (average 607 days, median 530 days) than not guilty cases (437 and 353), likely due to the additional time it takes for the sentencing portion to be completed (applicable to guilty cases only).

Compared to homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls, cases linked to Indigenous victims took slightly less time to complete. On average, this was a difference of 54 days, with a median difference of 56 days.

Observers have noted that lengthy court processes pose a burden for those with a vested interest in the proceedings, such as victims' family and community members ( National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls, 2019). This burden is felt particularly strongly by Indigenous community members, as trials often take place away from where they live and the monetary and time costs associated with travel to attend proceedings can be significant.

Summary

Despite ongoing efforts to identify and address the root causes of violence against Indigenous peoples, Indigenous women and girls in Canada continue to be overrepresented as victims of homicide. Between 2009 and 2021, 490 Indigenous women and girls were killed, at rate that was six times higher than among non-Indigenous women and girls (4.27 per 100,000 population, compared to 0.73).

The eventual outcome of a court case rests on several factors, beginning with the police investigation of the homicide. Whether a homicide is solved and how it is cleared by police determines whether it proceeds to the court stage. Between 2009 and 2021, most homicides of Indigenous women and girls were solved by police-that is, an accused person was identified in relation to the homicide. The proportion solved when the victim was non-Indigenous was similar.

Police also investigate and document various characteristics of each incident, including the relationship between the victim and the accused and possible motives, and these characteristics can influence what kind of charge is laid in the homicide. For most Indigenous women and girls who were killed, the accused was a family member or a current of former partner. Intoxication of the accused sometimes played a role in the homicide, and many were motivated by an argument or quarrel. In most homicides of Indigenous women and girls, the person accused was also Indigenous.

Differences in the types of charges associated with the homicides of Indigenous women and girls versus their non-Indigenous counterparts persist once a case proceeds to court. Again, first-degree murder charges were less common when the victim was an Indigenous woman or girl. Instead, many more homicides of Indigenous women and girls were processed in court as manslaughter, and manslaughter charges had the highest conviction rate of any charge. The frequency of manslaughter charges in homicides of Indigenous women and girls processed in court meant that the overall rate of guilty findings for all charges related to these homicides of Indigenous women and girls were similar to those that involved non-Indigenous victims.

Two-thirds of cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls between 2009 and 2021 returned a finding of guilt, a proportion that was higher than among non-Indigenous victims. Guilty findings were less common among Indigenous accused persons. When it came to sentencing, nine in ten cases linked to homicides of Indigenous women and girls with a finding of guilt resulted in a custody sentence, which was lower than in homicides of non-Indigenous victims.

On average, accused persons who were sentenced to custody in cases linked to the homicides of Indigenous women and girls were sentenced to just over eleven years in prison. When the victim was a non-Indigenous woman or girl, the sentence length was longer (just over fourteen years). The lengths of sentences given in homicides of Indigenous and non-Indigenous women and girls ultimately reflect the types of charges on which they are based. Cases linked to homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls are more likely to see convictions for the types of charges that carry the longest sentences, while the types of homicide charges that most often bring shorter sentences are more often seen in cases linked to Indigenous victims.

Detailed data tables
Table 1 Homicides, by gender and Indigenous identity, Canada, 2009 to 2021 Table 2 Homicides of women and girls, by Indigenous identity, clearance status, and selected victim characteristics, Canada, 2009 to 2021 Table 3 Indigenous identity of victims and persons accused of homicide, Canada, 2014 to 2021 Table 4 Homicides of women and girls, by Indigenous identity, clearance status, and selected incident characteristics, Canada, 2009 to 2021 Table 5 Logistic regression model: Odds of manslaughter versus murder charges being laid or recommended in relation to an incident of homicide, by select characteristics of the incident, the victim and the accused, 2014 to 2021 Table 6 Completed charges linked to police-reported homicides, by type of charge completed in adult criminal or youth court and Indigenous identity and gender of victim, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21 Table 7 Completed charges linked to police-reported homicides, by type of charge completed in adult criminal or youth court and Indigenous identity and gender of victim and final decision, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21 Table 8 Characteristics of victims associated with completed court cases involving a homicide charge, by Indigenous identity, final decision in the case, and selected victim characteristics, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21 Table 9 Decisions in completed court cases involving a completed homicide charge, by Indigenous identity of victim and accused and gender of victim, Canada, 2014/15 to 2020/21 Table 10 Characteristics of accused persons associated with completed court cases involving a homicide charge and final decision in the case, by Indigenous identity and gender of victim, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21 Table 11 Characteristics of incidents associated with completed court cases involving a homicide charge and final decision in the case, by Indigenous identity and gender of victim, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21 Table 12 Level of court and final decision in cases linked to police-reported homicides of Indigenous women and girls, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21
Data sources and methodology
Table 13 Length of time to complete a case linked to a police-reported homicide incident, by Indigenous identity and gender of victim and type of decision, Canada, 2009/10 to 2020/21
Homicide Survey

The Homicide Survey collects police-reported data on the characteristics of all homicide incidents, victims and accused persons in Canada. The Homicide Survey began collecting information on all murders in 1961 and was expanded in 1974 to include all incidents of manslaughter and infanticide. Although details on these incidents are not available prior to 1974, counts are available from the Uniform Crime Reporting Survey (UCR) and are included in the historical aggregate totals.

When a homicide becomes known to police, the investigating police service completes the survey questionnaires, which are then sent to Statistics Canada. There are cases where homicides become known to police months or years after they occurred. These incidents are counted in the year they become known to police (based on the report date). Information on persons accused of homicide is only available for solved incidents ( i.e., where at least one accused has been identified). Accused characteristics are updated as homicide cases are solved, and new information is submitted to the Homicide Survey. Information collected through the victim and incident questionnaires is also updated accordingly when a case is solved. For incidents involving more than one accused, only the relationship between the victim and the closest accused is recorded.

Indigenous identity is reported by police to the Homicide Survey and is determined through information found with the victim or accused person, such as Status cards, or through information supplied by victims' or accused persons' families, the accused persons themselves, community members, or other sources ( i.e., such as band records). Forensic evidence such as genetic testing results may also be an acceptable means of determining the Indigenous identity of victims.

For the purposes of the Homicide Survey, Indigenous identity includes those identified as First Nations persons (either Status or non-Status), Métis, Inuit, or an Indigenous identity where the Indigenous group is not known to police. Non-Indigenous identity refers to instances where the police have confirmed that a victim or accused person is not identified as an Indigenous person.

Indigenous identity reported as 'unknown' by police includes instances where police are unable to determine the Indigenous identity of the victim or accused person, where Indigenous identity is not collected by the police service, or where the accused person has refused to disclose their Indigenous identity to police.

The Homicide Survey collects information about homicides that occurred both on and off reserves.

The year 2019 marked the first cycle of collection of the Homicide Survey data for which information on gender identity was reported for victims and persons accused of homicide. Given the small counts of victims and accused persons reported or were identified as being non-binary, their data cannot be presented to protect privacy and confidentiality.

Integrated Criminal Court Survey

The Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS) collects statistical information on adult and youth court cases involving Criminal Code and other federal statute offences. Data contained in this article represent both the adult criminal court portion as well as the youth court portion of the survey.

All youth courts in Canada have reported data to the youth component of the survey since the 1991/1992 fiscal year. As of 2005/2006, all provincial and territorial (adult criminal) courts in 10 provinces and 3 territories report to the survey. However, information from superior courts in Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan as well as municipal courts in Quebec are not available for extraction from their electronic reporting systems and are therefore not reported to the survey. Superior court information for Prince Edward Island was also unavailable until 2018/2019.

The primary unit of analysis is a case. A case is defined as one or more charges against an accused person or company that were processed by the courts at the same time and received a final decision. A case combines all charges against the same person having one or more key overlapping dates (date of offence, date of initiation, date of first appearance, date of decision, or date of sentencing) into a single case.

A case that has more than one charge is represented by the charge with the "most serious offence" (MSO). The most serious offence is selected using the following rules. First, court decisions are considered and the charge with the "most serious decision" (MSD) is selected. Court decisions for each charge in a case are ranked from most to least serious as follows: 1) guilty, 2) guilty of a lesser offence, 3) acquitted, 4) stay of proceeding, 5) withdrawn, dismissed and discharged, 6) not criminally responsible, 7) other, and 8) transfer of court jurisdiction.

Second, in cases where two or more charges result in the same MSD ( e.g., guilty), Criminal Code sentences are considered. The charge with the most serious offence type is selected according to an offence seriousness scale, based on actual sentences handed down by courts in Canada. Each offence type is ranked by looking at (a) the proportion of guilty charges where custody was imposed and (b) the average (mean) length of custody for the specific type of offence. These values are multiplied together to arrive at the final seriousness ranking for each type of offence. If, after looking at the offence seriousness scale, two or more charges remain tied then information about the sentence type and duration of the sentence are considered ( e.g., custody and length of custody, then probation and length of probation, etc.).

Linkage file: Overview and limitations

Sections 2 and 3 in this Juristat article are based on a data file which linked police-reported data from the Homicide Survey and the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Survey with administrative data from the Integrated Criminal Court Survey (ICCS).

Homicides reported by police between 2009 and 2021, where there was at least one accused person identified, and charges were laid or recommended by police, were considered in scope. While the focus of this analysis is on the homicides of Indigenous women and girls, all homicide incidents were included in the linkage to permit comparisons with homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls and, in some cases, homicides of men and boys.

The linkage was conducted in multiple steps using key information about the accused persons in the homicide incidents. First, information about the persons, such as province, sex, age or birthdate, and soundex (an algorithm that encodes names) were considered. Next, any matches were further linked based on the incident date, the date it was reported to police, the date charges were laid.

According to the Homicide Survey, there were 389 Indigenous women and girls who were victims of a homicide between 2009 and 2021 where police laid or recommended charges against at least one accused person in the incident. Of these, 48% were successfully linked to at least one charge in court. This linkage rate was comparable to homicides of non-Indigenous women and girls (44%) and homicides of men and boys (49%) over the same period.

Limitations

The linkage allows for a greater examination of outcomes depending on characteristics of the victim, accused, and incident as captured by the Homicide Survey. That said, the linkage rate of Homicide Survey data, while comparable across groups, is lower than is typically seen when linking police-reported data and courts data. As such, there are limitations that should be considered when interpreting the findings, namely data coverage, which has a particularly notable impact on homicide data, and elapsed time between an incident and the completion of a court case.

In terms of data coverage, not all jurisdictions in Canada currently report data to the ICCS: information from superior courts in Ontario, Manitoba and Saskatchewan as well as municipal courts in Quebec are not reported, while superior court information for Prince Edward Island was also unavailable until 2018/2019. This absence of data from superior courts in these jurisdictions is particularly notable for this analysis, as more serious cases ( e.g., homicides) are processed in superior court.

In terms of time, some homicide incidents that did not successfully link to a completed charge may still be before the courts, particularly in recent years where the linkage rates were noticeably lower. Further, the most recent years included in the linkage were impacted by delays, closures, or modifications to criminal court processes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and related measures. As the ICCS data reflects only completed charges, those which are still active in the court system are not reflected in this linkage.

It is also possible that incidents do not successfully link due to missing or incomplete information in one or more of the files. Despite these limitations, however, the linked file affords the opportunity to examine quantitative and contextual factors, such as Indigenous identity, relationship, motive, and other characteristics that may be associated with court case characteristics and outcomes in greater detail than would be possible if using the ICCS data on its own.

Incidents may have involved multiple victims of different genders and different Indigenous identities. To avoid counting the same incident multiple times, incidents were classified according to the following hierarchy: if the incident involved a victim who was an Indigenous woman or girl, all victims and accused persons associated with the event are included in the category "homicides of Indigenous women and girls". For that reason, a small number of men and non-Indigenous women may also be included as victims in a homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl.

Next, if the incident involved a victim who was a non-Indigenous woman or girl, it was classified as a "homicide of non-Indigenous women and girls". Finally, all other homicides that did not involve any women or girls as victims were classified as "Homicide of men and boys". Victims whose gender was reported by police as unknown are excluded from the analysis, as are women and girls who were victims and whose Indigenous identity was reported as unknown (2% of all women and girls who were victims of homicide between 2009 and 2021).

References

Bressan, A. and Coady, K. (2017). Guilty pleas among Indigenous people in Canada. (Justice Research and Data). Department of Justice Canada.

Burczycka, M. (2017). Section 1: Profile of Canadian adults who experienced childhood maltreatment. In M. Burczycka and S. Conroy (Eds.), Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2015. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Clark, S. (2016). Evaluation of the Gladue Court Old City Hall, Toronto. Aboriginal Legal Services.

Clark, S. (2019). Overrepresentation of Indigenous People in the Canadian Criminal Justice System: Causes and Responses. (Justice Research and Data). Department of Justice Canada.

Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination of Women. (2015). Report of the Inquiry Concerning Canada of the Committee of the Elimination of Discrimination against Women under Article 8 of the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women. United Nations.

Criminal Code, R.S.C. (1985). c. C-46.

David, J.-D. & Jaffray, B. (2022). Homicide in Canada, 2021. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Department of Justice Canada. (n.d.). Governmental, Legislative and Judicial Responses

Gevikoglu, J. (2013). Ipeelee/Ladue and the conundrum of Indigenous identity in sentencing. The Supreme Court Law Review: Osgoode's Annual Constitutional Cases Conference, 63.

Heidinger, L. (2022a). Profile of Canadians who experienced victimization during childhood, 2018. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Heidinger, L. (2022b). Violent victimization and perceptions of safety: Experiences of First Nations, Métis and Inuit women in Canada. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Karam, M., Lukassen, J., Miladinovic, Z., and Wallace, M. (2020). Measuring efficiency in the Canadian adult criminal court system: Criminal court workload and case processing indicators. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women, Girls, and 2SLGBTQQIA+ People National Action Plan. (2021).

National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls. (2019). Reclaiming power and place: The Final Report of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls.

Native Women's Association of Canada. (2010). What Their Stories Tell Us: Research Findings from the Sisters in Spirit Initiative.

Perreault, S. (2022). Victimization of First Nations people, Métis and Inuit in Canada. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Pfefferle, B. R. (2008). Gladue Sentencing: Uneasy Answers to the Hard Problem of Aboriginal Over-Incarceration. Manitoba Law Journal, 113-143.

Rudin, J. (2009). Addressing Aboriginal Overrepresentation Post-Gladue: A Realistic Assessment of How Social Change Occurs. Criminal Law Quarterly, 54, 447.

Saghbini, C., Bressan, A., and Paquin-Marseille, L. (2021). Indigenous People in Criminal Court in Canada: An Exploration Using the Relative Rate Index. (Research and Statistics Division). Department of Justice Canada.

Sutton, D. (2023). Gender-related homicide of women and girls in Canada. ( Juristat). Statistics Canada.

Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future: summary of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.

Wilson, L. C. (2010). Beatty, JF, and the law of manslaughter. Alberta Law Review, 47, (3), 651-674.

Notes

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

Note

See Table 5 for a complete list of variables included in the model.

Note

Note

For instance, between 2009 and 2018, 58% of homicides of Indigenous women and girls where the incident was cleared by the laying or recommendation of charges were linked to a completed court case. The proportion varied by year, from a low of 44% (2011) to a high of 77% (2014). The proportions for homicides in 2019 (26%), 2020 (17%), and 2021 (0%) were much lower. Therefore, a higher linkage rate is to be expected as data are updated. Similar patterns were seen among non-Indigenous women and girls: between 2009 and 2018, 53% of homicides cleared by laying or recommendation of charges were linked to a completed court case, dropping considerably in 2019 (35%), 2020 (8%), and 2021 (0%). In this analysis, the median time to complete a case associated with the homicide of an Indigenous woman or girl was 433 days. In addition, the most recent years included in the linkage were impacted by delays, closures, or modifications to criminal court processes associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and related measures. As the ICCS data reflects only completed charges, those which are still active in the court system are not reflected in this linkage.

Note

Note

Analyses which make use of data from the Integrated Criminal Court Survey are often based on the most serious decision (MSD) approach, in which the charge with the most serious decision ( e.g., a guilty finding) is taken to represent the case, even if a more serious charge had been present in the case. In the present analysis, the approach taken has been to look at all charges when analyzing offences ( i.e., homicides), so that characteristics such as types of charges associated with homicides can be looked at (even if they were not the most serious charge in the case).

Note

Note

Note

It should be noted that for a case to be noted as having a finding of guilt, only one of its charges-and not necessarily the homicide charge-need result in a finding of guilt. For more information, see Data sources and methodology. The proportion of cases with a guilty finding is considerably higher than the proportion of individual charges with a guilty finding. This is largely due to the analytical approach, where cases with multiple charges are represented by a single charge, the most serious decision (MSD). The MSD takes into account the severity of the offence, but also the final decision, with findings of guilt taking precedence over other types of decision.

Note

Note

See footnote 4.

Note

Note

Note

Note

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Court outcomes in homicides of Indigenous women and girls, 2009 to 2021

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This Juristat article reviews court outcomes of cases linked to the homicides of First Nations, Métis and Inuit (Indigenous) women and girls. Using a linked data file containing records from the Homicide and Integrated Criminal Court Survey, the article examines how incidents of homicide move from t…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Before doing anything, we suggest that you read this first… Ally Bill of Responsibilities, Lynn Gehl‎ This ‘bill’ is a collection of thoughts on the responsibilities of non-Indigenous allies when interacting and working with Indigenous peoples and issues. It is important…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How many First Nations women and children are murdered? The figures are shocking – and yet incomplete

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Data collected from a variety of sources shows Indigenous women and children are killed and disappear at disproportionately high rates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Rate of female homicide victims in Canada by Aboriginal identity | Statista

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This statistic shows the rate of female homicides in Canada from 2001 to 2020, by Aboriginal identity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Centering Prevention of Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women | NIWRC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By Paula Julian, Filipina, Editor, Restoration Magazine & Senior Policy Specialist, NIWRC