SHARING THEIR STORIES: Narratives of Young Métis Parents and Elders about Parenting Catherine Graham and Tanya Davoren

SHARING THEIR STORIES: Narratives of Young Métis Parents and Elders about Parenting Catherine Graham and Tanya Davoren

Being Métis is not simply a matter of being of mixed First Nations and European heritage. Métis are a distinct people with a shared history dating back to the 18th century when the fur trade began its move towards the central western parts of North America, at which time fur traders and 'Indian' women entered into relationships with each other. As the offspring of these relationships grew up, they began to marry each other and settle into their own communities along fur trade route – around the Great Lakes, throughout the Prairie Provinces, and up to the Mackenzie River into what is now known as the Northwest Territories. The Métis within these communities had their own "unique culture, traditions, language (Michif), and way of life, collective consciousness and nationhood" (Métis National Council, n.d.). Over the course of history, the Métis have often been referred to as the 'forgotten people.' Métis were reduced to a position of irrelevance within the fabric of Canadian society. They were denied full membership in mainstream society because they were Aboriginal, and were also denied status as Indians under the Indian Act. Politically powerless, denied education because they did not pay taxes on their 'road allowance'3 homes, and forcibly kept away from the reserves, the Métis became increasingly marginalized (Shore, n.d., p. 1). The Métis Nation has had to fight tirelessly for the recognition of their rights. In 1982, Métis rights were entrenched in Section 35 of the Constitution Act, although these rights still remain largely undefined. The exception to this is the recognition of harvesting rights that were affirmed in the Supreme Court of Canada's decision in R v. Powley. In their summary of the case, Pape and Salter Barristers and Solicitors (n.d.) state that in addition to affirming harvesting rights, the court also affirmed that the term 'Métis' did not apply to all persons of mixed European and 'Indian' ancestry. It also set out three broad criteria for identifying rights holders under Section 35. These are: 3 Road allowance refers to the ditches on the side of roads where Métis who had no land of their own often built their homes. This is why Métis were sometimes referred to as the Road Allowance People. 4 It is not clear how many of those who self-identified as Métis in the Census would also qualify as possessing Aboriginal rights under Section 35. ∙ Self-Identification, meaning that the individual must self-identify as a member of a Métis community and have an ongoing connection to that community; ∙ Ancestral Connection, meaning that the individual must be able to prove that they have an ancestral connection to a historic Métis community; and ∙ Community Acceptance, meaning that a modern Métis community must accept the individual. That is, "[t]here must be proof of a solid bond of past and present mutual identification between the person and the other members of the Métis community" (p. 5)