See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271929263

The Psychological Cost of Restitution: Supportive Intervention

with Canadian Indian Residential School Survivors

Article  in  Journal of Aggression Maltreatment & Trauma · May 2013

DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2013.785459

CITATIONS READS

2 82

2 authors, including:

Alanaise Goodwill
Simon Fraser University
7 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Shifting Sands and Cultural Infusions: Career Decision Making Among People Who Are Doing Well View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alanaise Goodwill on 18 April 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

This article was downloaded by: [The University of British Columbia]
On: 18 March 2015, At: 12:58
Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment &

Trauma
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wamt20

The Psychological Cost of Restitution:

Supportive Intervention with Canadian
Indian Residential School Survivors
a b
Patrick J. Morrissette & Alanaise Goodwill
a
Professor of Health Studies, Brandon University , Brandon ,
Manitoba , Canada
b
Assistant Professor of Indigenous Health and Human Services,
Brandon University , Brandon , Manitoba , Canada
Published online: 17 May 2013.

To cite this article: Patrick J. Morrissette & Alanaise Goodwill (2013) The Psychological Cost of
Restitution: Supportive Intervention with Canadian Indian Residential School Survivors, Journal of
Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 22:5, 541-558, DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2013.785459

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2013.785459

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
 Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 22:541–558, 2013
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN: 1092-6771 print/1545-083X online
DOI: 10.1080/10926771.2013.785459

The Psychological Cost of Restitution:

Supportive Intervention with Canadian
Indian Residential School Survivors

PATRICK J. MORRISSETTE
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Professor of Health Studies, Brandon University, Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

ALANAISE GOODWILL
Assistant Professor of Indigenous Health and Human Services, Brandon University,
Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

This article describes intervention with Indian residential school

survivors during the Canadian government financial compensa-
tion process. This highly charged and multifaceted process requires
a systemic perspective when considering context, culture, and inter-
vention. Following a brief historical overview of the Canadian
Indian residential school era, this article outlines the indepen-
dent assessment process, reviews implications associated with abuse
disclosure, and discusses stages of supportive intervention.

KEYWORDS Aboriginal, abuse, compensation, memory, residen-

tial, survivors

Canadian history was made on May 10, 2006 when legal counsel for the
survivors of the Canadian Indian residential school system, the Assembly
of First Nations, other Aboriginal groups, the churches involved in operat-
ing residential schools, and the Government of Canada approved the Indian
residential schools settlement agreement. The settlement has several com-
ponents, including the common experience payment (CEP) that provides
a one-time payment to former students who lived at one of the identified
Indian residential schools. This payment (also known as the “10 plus 3” for-
mula) provides former students with a payment of $10,000 for the first school

Received 24 April 2012; revised 27 June 2012; accepted 25 July 2012.

Address correspondence to Patrick J. Morrissette, Brandon University, 270 18th Street,
Brandon, Manitoba R7A 6A9, Canada. E-mail: morrissette@brandonu.ca

541
 542 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

year (full or partial) at an eligible school and $3,000 for each additional
school year (full or partial). The agreement also includes an independent
assessment process (IAP) that allows former students who allege sexual,
physical, or psychological abuse to apply for additional compensation
(Indian Residential Schools Adjudication Secretariat [IRSAS], 2012).
The IAP is far from straightforward and holds salient psychological
implications for survivors and their significant others. This article explores
the individual and systemic implications associated with the IAP. Toward this
aim, we provide a brief historical overview of the Canadian Indian residential
school era, outline the financial compensation process, review implica-
tions associated with abuse disclosure, and discuss stages of supportive
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

intervention.
From the outset, several points merit clarification. First, the word sur-
vivor is purposefully used to highlight resilience, resolve, and strength.
Second, the words experiences, truths, and truth-telling are favorable for
the purposes of this article because they do not question the validity and
accuracy of experiences as the word stories might. Third, financial compen-
sation can be negotiated and therefore, not every claim goes to a formal
hearing. Finally, detailed information regarding the IAP and the Indian resi-
dential schools settlement agreement is beyond the scope of this article and
can be found elsewhere (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996).

CANADIAN INDIAN RESIDENTIAL SCHOOL

ERA: A BRIEF OVERVIEW

The Canadian Indian residential school era is well documented (Akhtar,

2010; MacDonald, 2007; Miller, 1996; Residential Schools, 2008). According to
the Aboriginal Healing Foundation (2010), between 1831 and 1998 approxi-
mately 130 industrial, boarding, and residential schools and hostels operated
across Canada. The Canadian government contracted with various religious
orders to educate and assimilate First Nations, Inuit, and Métis children
in a racially segregated boarding school system (Royal Commission on
Aboriginal Peoples, 1996). The contract partnership spanned 131 years from
1838 to 1969, at which point existing school staff became government
employees, operating the remaining schools until the last one closed in
1988 (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996). It is estimated that
150,000 Aboriginal, Inuit, and Métis children were removed from their com-
munities and forced to attend residential schools (Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada, 2012). While attending residential schools, children
were subjected to verbal, physical, and sexual abuse and were forbidden
to practice their indigenous language or any traditional beliefs (Akhtar,
2010; MacDonald, 2007; Residential Schools, 2008). Approximately 80,000
former students of the Indian residential schools are alive today (Oshynko,
 Indian Residential Schools 543

2006). Of this population, more than 15,000 individuals have filed claims
against the Government of Canada for participating in the funding, estab-
lishment, and operation of Indian residential schools (Oshynko, 2006). Due
to the advancing age and precarious health conditions of many survivors,
the Government of Canada faces tremendous pressure to resolve claims
efficaciously.

COMPENSATION PROCESS AND CRITERIA

Survivors can pursue two different avenues when seeking monetary com-
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

pensation. First, there is the CEP, which provides money to former Indian
residential school residents (IRSAS, 2012). No proof of specific abuses is
necessary for the CEP. Second, the IAP was designed to resolve claims
of abuse involving residents “who suffered sexual abuse, serious physical
abuse, or certain other wrongful acts which caused serious psychological
consequences” (IRSAS, 2012, p. 2). Individuals who fall within this category
have the option of resolving a claim individually or as a part of an established
survivor group.
Survivors who pursue the IAP must agree to a formal hearing involving
an attorney representing the government of Canada and an assigned adju-
dicator. Survivors can request legal representation should they choose. The
purpose of the formal hearing is to assess claimant credibility and to ensure
that there is prima facie basis to support the claim. Survivors can request the
attendance of a family member, Elder, support worker, or therapist. A church
representative may be invited to offer a formal public apology. The duration
and process of a hearing is dependent on key factors, including a survivor’s
psychological and physical health needs and the quantity of information
shared. Stress and anxiety coupled with the actual hearing process can be
overwhelming and emotionally draining for survivors. Therefore, survivors
have input into the location of the hearing and adjudicator gender. Survivors
can also state their preference in terms of an opening to the hearing to
respect their traditions and to enhance their comfort level (e.g., smudge,
opening prayer). Survivors can give their testimony in their own language,
with the assistance of a translator. Finally, survivors can choose the method
of solemnizing their testimony, which can include an oath on the Bible, an
affirmation, or use of sacred objects such as an eagle feather.

Compensable Abuse and the Point System

The compensation process is governed by established compensation rules
(IRSAS, 2012). In short, the distribution of compensation points regarding
acts proven ranges from 5 to 60 (see Table 1). The number of compensation
points hinges on specific abusive acts. For example, as indicated in Table 1,
 544 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

TABLE 1 Compensation Rules

Compensation
Acts proven points

SL5 • Repeated, persistent incidents of anal or vaginal 45–60

Sexual abuse intercourse.
Level 5 • Repeated, persistent incidents of anal or vaginal
penetration with an object.
SL4 • One or several incidents of anal or vaginal intercourse. 36–44
Sexual abuse • Repeated, persistent incidents of oral intercourse.
Level 4 • One or several incidents of anal or vaginal penetration
with an object.
SL3 • One or more incidents of oral intercourse. 26–35
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Sexual abuse • One or more incidents of digital anal or vaginal

Level 3 penetration.
• One or more incidents of attempted anal or vaginal
penetration (excluding attempted digital penetration).
• Repeated, persistent incidents of masturbation.
PL • One or more physical assaults causing a physical injury 11–25
Physical abuse that:
• led to or should have led to hospitalization or serious
medical treatment by a physician.
• caused permanent or demonstrated long-term
physical injury.
• impaired or disfigured.
• caused loss of consciousness.
• broke bones.
• caused serious but temporary incapacitation requiring
bed rest or infirmary care of several days; examples
include severe beating, whipping, and second-degree
burning.
SL2 • One or more incidents of simulated intercourse. 11–25
Sexual abuse • One or more incidents of masturbation.
Level 2 • Repeated, persistent fondling under clothing.
SL1 • One or more incidents of fondling or kissing. 5–10
Sexual abuse • Nude photographs taken of the claimant.
Level 1 • An adult employee or other adult who was lawfully on
school property exposing themselves.
• Any touching of a student, including touching with an
object, by an adult employee or other adult who was
lawfully on the premises that exceeds recognized
parental contact and violates the sexual integrity of the
student.
OWA • Being singled out for physical abuse by an adult 5–25
Other employee or other adult who was lawfully on the
wrongful act premises that was grossly excessive in duration and
frequency and caused psychological harms at the
H3 level or higher.
• Any other wrongful act committed by an adult
employee or other adult who was lawfully on the
premises that is proven to have caused psychological
consequential harms at the H4 or H5 level.
 Indian Residential Schools 545

at the high end survivors can receive between 45 and 60 compensation

points if they can prove (a) repeated, persistent incidents of anal or vagi-
nal intercourse, or (b) repeated, persistent incidents of anal or vaginal
penetration with an object. Based on the compensation rules, sexual abuse
is given priority. Survivors can also receive compensation points if they
can prove consequential harm (see Table 2). The distribution of level of

TABLE 2 Consequential Harm

Level of Compensation
harm Consequential harm points
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

H5 Continued harm resulting in serious dysfunction. 20–25

Evidenced by:
• psychotic disorganization, loss of ego boundaries,
personality disorders, pregnancy resulting from a defined
sexual assault or the forced termination of such
pregnancy or being required to place for adoption a child
resulting from such a pregnancy, self-injury, suicidal
tendencies, inability to form or maintain personal
relationships, chronic post-traumatic state, sexual
dysfunction, or eating disorders.
H4 Harm resulting in some dysfunction. Evidenced by: 16–19
• frequent difficulties with interpersonal relationships,
development of obsessive–compulsive and panic states,
severe anxiety, occasional suicidal tendencies, permanent
significantly disabling physical injury, overwhelming
guilt, self-blame, lack of trust in others, severe
post-traumatic stress disorder, some sexual dysfunction,
or eating disorders.
H3 Continued detrimental impact. Evidenced by: 11–15
• difficulties with interpersonal relationships; occasional
obsessive–compulsive and panic states; some
post-traumatic stress disorder; occasional sexual
dysfunction; addiction to drugs, alcohol, or substances; a
long-term significantly disabling physical injury resulting
from a defined sexual assault; or lasting and significant
anxiety, guilt, self-blame, lack of trust in others,
nightmares, bed-wetting, aggression, hypervigilance,
anger, retaliatory rage, and possible self-inflicted injury.
H2 Some detrimental impact. Evidenced by: 6–10
• occasional difficulty with personal relationships, some
mild post-traumatic stress disorder, self-blame, lack of
trust in others, and low self-esteem; and/or several
occasions and several symptoms of anxiety, guilt,
nightmares, bed-wetting, aggression, panic states,
hypervigilance, retaliatory rage, depression, humiliation,
loss of self-esteem.
H1 Modest detrimental impact. Evidenced by: 1–5
• occasional short-term, one of anxiety, nightmares,
bed-wetting, aggression, panic states, hypervigilance,
retaliatory rage, depression, humiliation, loss of
self-esteem.
 546 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

harm compensation points ranges from 1 to 25 (IRSAS, 2012). As outlined

in Table 2, the highest level of harm (H5) requires continued harm resulting
in serious dysfunction (e.g., psychotic disorganization, self-injury, chronic
posttraumatic state, and sexual dysfunction). The lowest level is referred to
as modest detrimental impact (e.g., short-term anxiety, enuresis, depression,
and loss of self-esteem). In essence, the degree of victimization is measured
by the number of points that are granted following a formal hearing. A for-
mula then equates compensation points with financial compensation. For
example, at the low end, 1 to 10 points equates to between $5,000 and
$10,000. At the highest end, 121 or more compensation points equates up to
$275,000.
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

ABUSE DISCLOSURE PROCESS

There are four distinct junctures where survivors must disclose their abuse
during the IAP. First, survivors must first document acts of abuse when com-
pleting the comprehensive application form. Although this process primarily
entails paperwork, survivors face the task of recalling, acknowledging, and
describing traumatic events. For some survivors, this process in itself is dis-
tressing and can trigger painful memories and flashbacks (Aboriginal Healing
Foundation, 2010). In some circumstances, offspring or a significant other
might be asked to assist in clarifying and preparing the aforementioned doc-
umentation. This commonly occurs when language translation, emotional
support, or both are required. For those assisting in this process, it might
be the first time they are privy to the graphic details of the survivor’s abuse.
As a result, survivors must deal with their own reactions and emotions as
well as those of others. In one particular situation, a daughter of a survivor
became emotionally distraught as her mother described her physical and
sexual victimization. The daughter was aware that her mother attended a
residential school but was unacquainted with the severity of abuse that her
mother endured. The daughter reported experiencing nightmares that were
associated with the traumatic events revealed during her mother’s disclo-
sure. Although traumatized by the disclosure, she persisted due to a sense
of loyalty and concern for her mother.
Second, some survivors might disclose and elaborate on their abusive
experiences with an attorney. At this juncture, experiences and the manner
and degree to which they transpired are carefully reviewed and clarified.
In the best interest of their clients, attorneys have the unenviable task of
inviting survivors to provide graphic details, retrieve information, and reveal
troubling aspects of their traumatic past. This process is crucial in preparing
survivors for the harsh reality of the formal settlement hearing and for a
fair settlement. Third, experiences are then shared with a support worker
or therapist to assess the need for support and clinical intervention. Finally,
 Indian Residential Schools 547

the survivor’s abusive history is retold in the presence of strangers (e.g., the
adjudicator, attorney representing the government, church representative)
during the formal settlement hearing.
It is worth noting that while seeking clarification during the formal set-
tlement hearing, adjudicators have the latitude to probe deeply into a client’s
abusive and traumatic experience. Adjudicators are attorneys selected by an
oversight committee. Each adjudicator is trained to facilitate opportunities
for healing and reconciliation and is the only person who can ask ques-
tions during the formal proceeding (Schedule D of the Indian Residential
School Settlement, 2012). Although forewarned about the likelihood of such
probing, this process can be a startling and disturbing experience for sur-
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

vivors and all involved. Throughout the various stages of disclosure, support
workers, therapists, or both are available to survivors.

Implications of Abuse Disclosure

Due to the absence of qualitative research regarding the multiple disclosure
process, the immediate and long-term experience of survivors who disclose,
describe, and relive traumatic events remains unknown. Ullman, Foynes, and
Tang (2010) pointed to the limited data regarding how cultural dimensions of
diversity (e.g., nationality, religiosity, socioeconomic status) can influence the
disclosure process. Ramona (2010) spoke to the complexity of disclosure and
highlighted the interaction and influence of family, community, cultural, and
societal factors. Interestingly, Bryant-Davis, Chung, and Tillman (2009) noted
that ethnic minority sexual assault survivors are too often left in the margins.
These authors discussed how a myriad of factors including racism, cultural
and value differences, lack of flexibility and trust, and historical government
inactivity create barriers and discourage individuals from minority popula-
tions from seeking help. The effect of forced assimilation and acculturation,
current oppression, and the enduring indignities experienced by people of
color can also trigger memories of historical and continuing injustices (Hill,
Lau, & Sue, 2010).
The recollection, disclosure, and processing of traumatic events is a
highly complex matter (e.g., Ahrens, Campbell, Terrier-Thames, Wasco, &
Sefl, 2007; Crowley, 2007; Danieli, 2009; Kenny et al., 2009; Kraft, 2002;
Morrissette & Naden, 1998). Ullman (2011), for example, provided a detailed
review regarding the disclosure of sexual trauma and concluded, “Although
trauma disclosure might be helpful in some circumstances, in other cir-
cumstances it might not be therapeutic” (p. 158). Among others (e.g.,
DeGiacomo, L’Abate, Pennebaker, & Rumbaugh, 2010; Frattaroli, 2006;
Lepore, Ragan, & Jones, 2000), Ullmann (2011) pointed out that trauma
disclosure might have a cathartic effect that reduces internal stress and
thus improves physical health. On the other hand, the experience could
be antitherapeutic (Feldthusen, Hankivsky, & Greaves, 2000; Newgent,
 548 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

Fender-Scarr, & Bromley, 2002; Seery, Silver, Holman, Ence, & Chu, 2008)
and there is the risk of clients experiencing further psychological distress
subsequent to their disclosure or the hearing process. Seery et al. (2008)
noted that people might be negatively impacted when they do not receive
the support they desire or expect from their support system following a
disclosure. O’Loughlin (2007) posited, “While we want to hope that trauma
victims will recover from trauma and experience integration this will not
be possible for all victims. The task of opening up the past may actu-
ally lead to re-victimization for some victims, despite our best intentions”
(p. 202). Ultimately, survivors enter into a cost–benefit analysis and care-
fully weigh the consequences of disclosing their abuse (Sinclair & Gold,
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

1997). While deliberating their options, survivors anticipate family and com-
munity reactions as well as the potential impact a disclosure will have on
their own physical and psychological well-being. It should be emphasized
that survivors might have to wait several months before a formal hearing
is scheduled. Consequently, they are left to contend with memories of their
trauma, the implications of their disclosure, and the anxiety surrounding their
impending hearing. Providing support and intervention to survivors during
this waiting period becomes critical.

Memory and Trauma Articulation

The process of seeking clarification regarding alleged abuse is remarkable
in two obvious ways. First, survivors are asked to recollect events that have
occurred during childhood and adolescence. In some cases, for example,
this could mean going back more than 80 years. Second, survivors are asked
to recall and articulate traumatic memories. For example, an elderly client
who was sexually assaulted during early childhood was required to provide
detailed information about the approximate time and location of the assaults,
the perpetrator, the method and number of assaults, the duration of the
assaults, her physical and psychological reaction during the assaults, and
finally the psychological and physical consequences of the assaults. While
recounting her abuse, the client would frequently pause, required a shawl
to remain warm, struggled with a dry mouth to speak, and would peer
over at her daughter and wellness worker for support. Eventually, the client
requested a recess and was provided the necessary care to proceed. Despite
the best efforts to prepare survivors, the course and tone of a hearing is
unpredictable and is managed by the adjudicator.
Formal hearings can be lengthy and physically and emotionally demand-
ing on survivors who might be frail, intimidated, and overwhelmed with the
proceedings. The task of remembering and accurately communicating can
be arduous, frustrating, and maddening (Bolkosky, 2004). Survivors come
to realize that it is impossible to fully describe and communicate their per-
sonal experiences. Similarly, although therapists might attempt to empathize
 Indian Residential Schools 549

with survivors, in reality it is impossible for these professionals to fully

comprehend how frustrating it must be for survivors to find themselves in
this position.

Survivor Shame and Guilt

Among the myriad of feelings expressed during the disclosure process, post-
traumatic shame and guilt appear most prominent (Wilson, Drozdek, &
Turkovic, 2006). Individuals might experience these feelings to varying
degrees. To provide clarification, Wilson et al. (2006) noted that guilt refers
to overt actions, whereas shame is an attribution process involving personal
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

integrity and moral goodness. Of course, shame and guilt can coexist and
will depend on the abusive experiences endured by a survivor. Moreover,
traumatized individuals might want to avoid exposure or confrontation with
memories and feelings that contribute to a sense of shame and humiliation
(Morrissette, 1994; Wilson et al., 2006). Garnefski and Arends (1998) reported
that the experience of sexual abuse affects boys more than girls in terms of
alcohol and drug use, and aggressive or criminal behavior, truancy, and
suicidal ideation and behavior. The latter is consequential when consider-
ing that although the process of disclosing and describing sexual abuse can
be difficult for both males and females (Hebert, Tourigny, Cyr, McDuff, &
Joly, 2009; Lab & Moore, 2005; Sorsoli, Kia-Keating, & Grossman, 2008), the
process affects males differently (Chan, 2010; Tsui, Cheung, & Leung, 2010).
Two specific forms of guilt that survivors report pertain to survivor guilt
and bystander guilt. In terms of the former, survivors ask the fundamental
question, “Why did I survive?” Survivors who experience this form of guilt
struggle with relief at being spared while others perished. Survivors who
experience bystander guilt express remorse and self-condemnation for failing
to help other victims during or after their trauma. Janson, Carney, Hazler, and
Oh (2009) remarked on the extant research and stated, “witnessing low-level
repetitive abuse may affect bystanders and direct victims in similar physio-
logical and psychological ways that can stay with them for years to come”
(p. 319). Experiencing both forms of guilt simultaneously is not uncommon
for survivors. The prominence of culture in relationship to the constructs
of shame and guilt is critical when working with survivors (Morrissette,
2008). Despite the circumstances they endured, there are survivors who feel
that they failed to maintain culturally defined values. Consequently, these
individuals might turn inward and remain haunted by shame, guilt, or both.

STAGES OF INTERVENTION

The following suggested stages of intervention are based on clinical expe-

rience and have been designed to assist survivors and significant others.
 550 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

A literature review indicates that intervention with survivors is recommended

but specific guidelines have not been developed. The following interven-
tion involves reviewing experiences, discussing the disclosure process, and
supporting survivors and significant others as they prepare for the formal
settlement hearing. The process involves distinct stages that include (a)
survivor engagement and validation, (b) therapeutic socialization and inter-
vention clarification, (c) abuse identification and articulation, and (d) formal
disclosure and follow-up. Each step is described next.

Stage 1: Survivor Engagement and Validation

Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Engaging survivors and validating their experience is essential when working

toward establishing trust and therapeutic rapport. Colonialism, marginal-
ization, and persistent inequities endured by First Nations and Aboriginal
peoples are ongoing processes that affect the process of help-seeking among
dominant forms of therapeutic service provision (Morrissette, 2008). Bhugra
and DeSilva (2000) addressed the issue of missionary racism and patron-
ization. The engagement and validation process is continuous throughout
the therapeutic relationship and involves therapist transparency. Among
other things, therapist transparency can involve (a) describing one’s clinical
qualifications, (b) elaborating on one’s experience in working with trauma
survivors, (c) explaining one’s interest in the settlement process, and (d)
allying with survivors by expressing interest in understanding them as indi-
viduals and working with and for them. Therapist disclosure is a key element
in relationship development. Conversely, prohibition of disclosure interferes
in the promotion of supportive relationships and perpetuates a sense of
isolation (Gartner, 1999).
The engagement and validation process becomes particularly impor-
tant for non-Aboriginal therapists because the abuse that will be discussed
was at the hands of Euro-Canadians (Nuttgens & Campbell, 2010; Smith &
Morrissette, 2001). This sensitive issue needs to be openly addressed to estab-
lish transparency, trust, and a culturally infused working alliance (Collins &
Arthur, 2010). In discussing the interfacing between Native and non-Native
therapists, several authors (LaFromboise & Dixon, 1981; Thomason, 1991)
underscore trustworthiness. Careful consideration of cultural imperatives,
beliefs, and practices is essential (e.g., Hill et al., 2010), including the Seven
Grandfather Teachings (Beaver, 2013). To effectively engage survivors, sev-
eral factors require attention, including therapist communication skills and
interview location.

EMPATHIC LISTENING

Empathic listening is paramount when communicating with and engaging

survivors. The time devoted to this process will depend on the needs of
 Indian Residential Schools 551

each survivor. According to Egan (2010), “Listening, then, is a very active

process that is at the heart of understanding” (p. 162). In short, empathic
listening involves being with and working toward understanding a client’s
world. Asking open-ended questions and encouraging survivors to pur-
sue areas of inquiry demonstrates respect and patience, and can lead to
empathic responding. The ultimate goal is to accurately understand a sur-
vivor’s past and current experience. This process can be challenging when
translation is required. Experience dictates that therapists need to talk less
and listen more. The principles of mindfulness are apropos when supporting
survivors. Boudette (2011) discussed the integration of mindfulness into ther-
apy and suggested that by slowing down and observing situations, moment
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

by moment, space opens up and new awareness can ensue. Mindfulness can
assist therapists in remaining sensitive to client distress and aware of what is
being said and conveyed by clients.

SYSTEMIC IMPLICATIONS

Survivors often request the support of significant others when recounting

their abuse. Consequently, there is the potential for secondary traumatic
stress (Morrissette, 2004) and the contagion of traumatic experiences. The
latter is common in situations when survivors have concealed or minimized
their trauma over the years. As a result, therapists must remain cognizant of
the emotional disposition of significant others and the influence that these
individuals can have on the survivor. For example, a survivor might be reluc-
tant to elaborate on an experience if he or she senses that a family member is
negatively affected. In short, this protective response could impede or derail
the survivor’s disclosure. When a survivor demonstrates a sudden mood shift
or change in conversation, it would be prudent for therapists to respond
accordingly and respectfully. Simply asking if the conversation should pro-
ceed usually provides survivors time to assess their situation and determine
the course of the conversation. For example, during one conversation a sur-
vivor noticed that her daughter was becoming tearful as she shared her
experience. In response, the survivor looked down at her lap and informed
the therapist that she needed to rest. The therapist understood that the sur-
vivor wished to end the conversation, thanked the survivor for sharing with
him, and brought the interview to a close.

STEREOTYPING
Stereotyping First Nations and Aboriginal peoples as a homogeneous group
whose members adhere to traditions and beliefs must be avoided and the
diversity among First Nations and Aboriginal culture needs to be recognized
(Choney, Berryhill-Paapke, & Robbins, 1995; Thomason, 1991; Trimble &
Medicine, 1993). Nuttgens and Campbell (2010) reported, “It is helpful to
 552 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

keep in mind that there are 49 distinct Amerindian cultures, not includ-
ing other First Nations people such as Metis, Dene, and Inuit” (p. 120).
Multicultural counseling competence includes a cultural awareness of self as
the therapist, of the client(s), as well as a culture-centered working alliance
(Collins & Arthur, 2010). These domains are central to the building of an
effective working alliance, engaging in the process of cultural inquiry, and
assessing the role of personal cultural identity in the clients’ presenting con-
cerns and experiences while also recognizing individual attitudes and beliefs.
The various ways that different cultures respond to human problems and
cultural trauma has also been recognized (Salzman, 2001).
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Stage 2: Therapeutic Socialization and Intervention Clarification

It is naive to assume that survivors will know what to expect and how the
therapeutic relationship will unfold. For example, it might be the first time
that a survivor has met with a non–First Nations and Aboriginal professional.
Therefore, it is incumbent on therapists to carefully explain their supportive
role, differentiate their role from other professionals involved in the settle-
ment process, and ensure that their participation has been requested. During
this stage, therapists can also ascertain whether their attendance at the formal
hearing would be required.
Disclosing a traumatic past might be an attempt on behalf of survivors to
reclaim their lives. The benefits of disclosure could be diluted when personal
accounts and experiences are invalidated (Lepore et al., 2000). Follette, Bash,
and Sewell (2010) underscored the importance of creating an environment
wherein disclosures will not be minimized or denied. An inherent challenge,
however, pertains to a sense of powerlessness. Follette et al. (2010) claimed
that a lack of power can contribute to a lack of assertiveness within life sit-
uations and therapy. For men, the powerlessness engendered by childhood
sexual abuse is conspicuously at odds with masculine ideals that impede
reporting and disclosure (Kia-Keating, Grossman, Sorsoli, & Epstein, 2005).
Consequently, a collaborative therapeutic stance is required to empower sur-
vivors. In one particular case, a survivor grappled with a genuine desire to
forgive her transgressors while simultaneously exposing their abusive acts.

Stage 3: Abuse Identification and Clarification

Therapists can be instrumental in helping survivors identify and articulate
their abuse as they prepare for the formal settlement hearing. Therapists
must remain mindful that because each survivor has been affected in his or
her own personal way, it would be erroneous to generalize and assume that
each survivor’s experience was similar. Therefore, in searching for unique
meanings associated with personal maltreatment, both therapist and survivor
embark on an individual therapeutic path. Toward this end, therapists must
first prepare themselves to hear disturbing and graphic experiences of abuse
 Indian Residential Schools 553

and neglect. If therapists knowingly (e.g., verbally disclose their discomfort)

or unknowingly (e.g., distressed facial expressions) indicate that they are
overwhelmed, there is a risk that survivors will retreat and avoid sharing
their experiences to protect the therapist.
Although not having been directly affected by the traumatic events
described by survivors, therapists can find themselves wrestling with their
own emotional, spiritual, and physical reactions. Bearing witness to trau-
matic experiences can be confusing and upsetting (O’Loughlin, 2007). The
distress expressed by therapists usually pertains to vicarious trauma cou-
pled with one’s inability to immediately alleviate the pain of the survivor.
Therapists can retreat emotionally during a disclosure and dialogue pro-
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

cess. This reaction is not propelled by disinterest, but rather a self-protective

mechanism that serves to guard against psychological discomfort. Through
cognitive avoidance (Scott & Stradling, 1994) therapists avoid thinking about
the traumatic event(s) or aspects of it. To assist survivors, therapists must
position themselves so that survivors are able to identify and describe an
event to the degree to which they are comfortable.

Stage 4: Formal Disclosure and Follow-Up

Despite months of preparation, survivors might find the formal hearing
unnerving. Although it is the moment they have been anticipating, they can
experience tremendous anxiety and apprehension. Participating in the settle-
ment process and publicly disclosing their childhood abuse impacts survivors
differently (Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2010). On the one hand, some
survivors report benefitting from sharing their experiences and perceive their
disclosure as instrumental in their ongoing healing process. On the other
hand, some survivors describe their experience less favorably.
Once the formal hearing ends, survivors are left to contend with the
residual effect of the settlement process. Only survivors can determine
the value of their disclosure and participation. Some survivors might feel
relieved, whereas others might feel no different or regret their decision
to enter into the process. There remains limited research to determine the
immediate and long-term risks and benefits associated with participating in
the formal hearing process (Aboriginal Healing Foundation, 2010). Each case
has its own complexities, needs, risks, and challenges. Therefore, attention
needs to be devoted to the possibility that a survivor has not fully processed
his or her disclosure and requires time and support to do so.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

As evident in the compensation rules, there is an exponential relationship

between the degree of abuse and financial compensation. Therefore, it is
important that this issue is addressed with survivors and significant others
 554 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

at the outset of treatment. More specifically, it should be explained that the

process will require uncovering painful and graphic details that could result
in stress and the triggering of negative memories and emotions (Aboriginal
Healing Foundation, 2010). During this process, the potential advantages and
disadvantages of disclosing childhood abusive events should be reviewed
with survivors. Survivors need to understand that they might be encouraged
by legal counsel to recall specific details surrounding traumatic events to
legitimize their claim and increase their financial compensation. Although
monetary compensation increases with the degree of abuse, survivors might
eventually pay an immediate and future emotional price as they disclose
information.
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

The intentional or unintentional effort of therapists to encourage sur-

vivors to delve deeper into their past experiences presents a host of ethical,
professional, and clinical issues. Clearly, the role of a therapist is not to
prompt survivors to recall traumatic events to bolster their chances of greater
financial compensation via additional clinical services. Rather, a therapist’s
role is to assist survivors in dealing with issues that surface during the
disclosure process and while they are preparing for their formal hearing.
In essence, survivors lead the way and determine their needs throughout the
process. Providing the safe conditions for survivors to explore and reflect on
their experiences at their own pace reduces the possibility of psychological
reinjury (Herman, 1992) and adheres to the ethical pillar of nonmaleficence.
In one situation, a client revealed that he had traveled a great distance to
meet with the therapist on the advice of his attorney. At the end of the brief
interview, the individual decided that he did not require assistance from the
therapist and did not have any additional information to share regarding his
abuse. The survivor’s position was honored and the therapist did not pursue
further questioning.
Survivors who are unfamiliar with mainstream helping professionals
might be justifiably skeptical about their involvement despite the endorse-
ment of attorneys or family members and significant others. In the spirit
of the ethical principle of beneficence, survivors are provided with access
and opportunities to engage in Indigenous healing approaches. Before
engaging with survivors, therapists need to reflect on their cultural com-
petency, knowledge of the Indian residential school era, and clinical
skills.

CONCLUSION

Assisting residential school survivors in navigating the IAP requires a sensi-

tivity to context, culture, and clinical intervention. Survivors face the task of
retrieving and publicly revealing horrific memories that can provoke a mul-
tiplicity of emotions including grief, remorse, and anger. The latter becomes
 Indian Residential Schools 555

particularly salient for non–First Nations and Aboriginal therapists who might
represent an oppressive culture.
For some survivors, formal hearings provide an opportunity to finally
reveal the truth, describe their experiences, and assist in the preven-
tion of future similar human tragedies and cultural trauma (O’Loughlin,
2007; Salzman, 2001). Further, revealing personal, historical, and cumula-
tive trauma can be instrumental in preventing the transmission of inter-
generational trauma and the risk of accompanying individual (Bombay,
Matheson, & Anisman, 2011; Corntassel, Chaw-win-is, & T’lakwadzi, 2009;
Yellow Horse Brave Heart, 2003) and social pathology (O’Loughlin, 2007).
Danieli (2009) spoke to the conspiracy of silence that can surround trauma
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

and argued that that silence is profoundly destructive and can prevent a
constructive response from victims, their families, society, and a nation.
As discussed in this article, the disclosure of abuse can affect both vic-
tims and significant others and thus warrants ongoing assessment. In working
toward co-creating a safe and respectful therapeutic relationship, it is incum-
bent on therapists to pay particular attention to ethical practice and the
intervention process.

REFERENCES

Aboriginal Healing Foundation. (2010). The Indian residential schools settlement

agreement’s common experience payment and healing: A qualitative study
exploring impacts on recipients. Ottawa: Author. Retrieved from http://www.
ahf.ca/downloads/cep-2010-healing.pdf
Ahrens, C., Campbell, R., Terrier-Thames, N., Wasco, S., & Sefl, T. (2007). Deciding
whom to tell: Expectations and outcomes of rape survivors’ first disclosures.
Psychology of Women Quarterly, 31, 38–49.
Akhtar, Z. (2010). Canadian genocide and official culpability. International Criminal
Law Review, 10, 111–135.
Beaver, R. (2013). Sacred seven grandfather teachings. Retrieved from http://
www.ronniebeaver.myknet.org
Bhugra, M., & DeSilva, P. (2000). Couple therapy across cultures. Sexual &
Relationship Therapy, 15, 183–192.
Bolkosky, S. (2004). The trauma of memory: Exploring holocaust testimonies.
Contemporary Psychology, 49, 435–436.
Bombay, A., Matheson, K., & Anisman, H. (2011). The impact of stressors on sec-
ond generation Indian residential school survivors. Transcultural Psychiatry,
48, 367–391.
Boudette, R. (2011). Integrating mindfulness into the therapy hour. Eating Disorders,
19, 108–115.
Bryant-Davis, T., Chung, H., & Tillman, S. (2009). From the margins to the center:
Ethnic minority women and the mental health effects of sexual assault. Trauma,
Violence, & Abuse, 10, 330–357.
 556 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

Chan, S. (2010). Trauma from sexual abuse: The untold story of male victims in
Hong Kong. Hong Kong Journal of Social Work, 44, 69–76.
Choney, S., Berryhill-Paapke, E., & Robbins, R. (1995). The acculturalization
of American Indians: Developing frameworks for research and practice. In
J. Ponterotto, J. Casus, L. Suzuki, & C. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
multicultural counseling (pp. 155–180). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Collins, S., & Arthur, N. (2010). Culture-infused counselling: A model for developing
multicultural competence. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 23, 217–233.
Corntassel, J., Chaw-win-is, & T’lakwadzi. (2009). Indigenous storytelling, truth-
telling, and community approaches to reconciliation. English Studies in Canada,
35, 137–159.
Crowley, S. (2007). Memories of childhood sexual abuse: Narrative analyses of types,
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

experiences, and processes of remembering. Journal of Interpersonal Violence,

22, 1095–1113.
Danieli, Y. (2009). Massive trauma and the healing role of reparative justice. Journal
of Traumatic Stress, 22, 351–357.
DeGiacomo, P., L’Abate, L., Pennebaker, J., & Rumbaugh, D. (2010). Amplifications
and applications of Pennebaker’s analogic to digital model in health promo-
tion, prevention, and psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy,
17, 355–367.
Egan, G. (2010). The skilled helper: A problem management and opportunity
development approach to helping. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Feldthusen, B., Hankivsky, O., & Greaves, L. (2000). Therapeutic consequences of
civil actions of damages and compensation claims by victims of sexual abuse.
Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 12, 66–116.
Follette, V., Bash, H., & Sewell, T. (2010). Adult disclosure of a history of childhood
sexual abuse: Implications for behavioral psychotherapy. Journal of Trauma &
Dissociation, 11, 228–243.
Frattaroli, J. (2006). Experimental disclosure and its moderators: A meta-analysis.
Psychological Bulletin, 132, 823–865.
Garnefski, N., & Arends, E. (1998). Sexual abuse and adolescent maladjustment:
Differences between male and female victims. Journal of Adolescence, 21,
99–107.
Gartner, R. B. (1999). Betrayed as boys: Psychodynamic treatment of sexually abused
men. New York: Guilford.
Hebert, M., Tourigny, M., Cyr, M., McDuff, P., & Joly, J. (2009). Prevalence of child-
hood sexual abuse and timing of disclosure in a representative sample of adults
from Quebec. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 54, 631–636.
Herman, J. (1992). Trauma and recovery. New York: Basic Books.
Hill, J., Lau, M., & Sue, D. (2010). Integrating trauma psychology and cul-
tural psychology: Indigenous perspectives on theory, research, and practice.
Traumatology, 16, 39–47.
Indian Residential Schools Adjudication Secretariat. (2012). Independent assessment
process. Retrieved from http://www.irsad-sapi.gc.ca/index-eng.asp
Janson, G., Carney, J., & Hazler, R., & Oh, I. (2009). Bystander’s reactions to wit-
nessing repetitive abuse experiences. Journal of Counseling & Development, 87,
319–326.
 Indian Residential Schools 557

Kenny, L., Bryant, R., Silove, D., Creamer, M., O’Donnell, M., & McFarlane, A. (2009).
Distant memories: A prospective study of vantage point of trauma memories.
Psychological Science, 20, 1049–1052.
Kia-Keating, M., Grossman, F. K., Sorsoli, L., & Epstein, M. (2005). Containing and
resisting masculinity: Narratives of renegotiation among resilient male survivors
of childhood sexual abuse. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6, 169–185.
Kraft, R. (2002). The trauma of memory: Exploring holocaust testimonials. Westport,
CT: Praeger/Greenwood.
Lab, D., & Moore, E. (2005). Prevalence and denial of sexual abuse in a male
psychiatric inpatient population. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 18, 323–330.
LaFromboise, T., & Dixon, D. (1981). American Indian perception of trustworthiness
in a counseling interview. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 28, 135–139.
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Lepore, S., Ragan, J., & Jones, S. (2000). Talking facilitates cognitive-emotional pro-
cesses of adaptation to an acute stressor. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 78, 499–508.
MacDonald, D. (2007). First Nations, residential schools, and the Americanization of
the Holocaust: Rewriting indigenous history in the United States and Canada.
Canadian Journal of Political Science, 40, 995–1015.
Miller, J. (1996). Shingwauk’s vision: A history of Native residential schools. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
Morrissette, P. (1994). The holocaust of First Nations people: Residual effects
on parenting and treatment implications. Contemporary Family Therapy: An
International Journal, 16, 381–392.
Morrissette, P. (2004). The pain of helping: Psychological injury of helping profession-
als. New York: Brunner-Routledge.
Morrissette, P. (2008). Clinical engagement of Canadian First Nations couples.
Journal of Family Therapy, 30, 60–77.
Morrissette, P., & Naden, M. (1998). An interactional view of traumatic stress among
First Nations counselors. Journal of Family Psychotherapy, 9, 43–60.
Newgent, R., Fender-Scarr, L. K., & Bromley, J. L. (2002). The retraumatization
of child sexual abuse: The second assault. Trauma and Loss: Research and
Interventions, 2, 2–17.
Nuttgens, S., & Campbell, A. (2010). Multicultural considerations for counseling First
Nations clients. Canadian Journal of Counseling, 44, 115–129.
O’Loughlin, M. (2007). Bearing witness to troubled memory. Psychoanalytic Review,
94, 190–212.
Oshynko, N. (2006). Claimant document production in Indian residential schools
resolution: Canada’s alternative dispute resolution process. Retrieved from
http://summit.sfu.ca/item/2369
Ramona, A. (2010). An ecological analysis of child sexual abuse disclosure:
Considerations for child and adolescent mental health. Journal of the Canadian
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 19, 32–39.
Residential Schools. (2008). A history of residential schools in Canada. Retrieved
from http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2008/05/16/f-faqs-residential-
schools.html
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Report of the Royal Commission
on Aboriginal Peoples. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.
 558 P. J. Morrissette and A. Goodwill

Salzman, M. (2001). Cultural trauma and recovery: Perspective from terror manage-
ment theory. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 2, 172–191.
Schedule D of the Indian Residential School Settlement. (2012). Retrieved from
http://www.residentialschoolsettlement.ca/Schedule_D-IAP.PDF
Scott, M., & Stradling, S. (1994). Counseling for posttraumatic stress disorder. London:
Sage.
Seery, M., Silver, R., Holman, A., Ence, W., & Chu, T. (2008). Expressing thoughts
and feelings following a collective trauma: Immediate responses to 9/11 predict
negative outcomes in a national sample. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 76, 657–667.
Sinclair, B., & Gold, S. (1997). The psychological impact of withholding disclosure
of child sexual abuse. Violence & Victims, 12, 137–145.
Downloaded by [The University of British Columbia] at 12:58 18 March 2015

Smith, B., & Morrissette, P. (2001). The experiences of White male counselors who
work with First Nations clients. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 35, 74–88.
Sorsoli, L., Kia-Keating, M., & Grossman, F. (2008). “I keep that hush-hush”: Male sur-
vivors of sexual abuse and the challenges of disclosure. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 55, 333–345.
Thomason, T. (1991). Counseling Native Americans: An introduction for non-Native
Americans. Journal of Counseling and Development, 69, 321–327.
Trimble, J., & Medicine, B. (1993). Diversification of American Indians: Forming an
Indigenous perspective. In U. Kim & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Indigenous psychologies:
Research and experience in cultural context (pp. 133–151). Newbury Park, CA:
Sage.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2012). Interim report. Retrieved
http://www.attendancemarketing.com/~attmk/TRC_jd/Interim_report_English_
electronic_copy.pdf
Tsui, V., Cheung, M., & Leung, P. (2010). Help-seeking among male victims of partner
abuse: Men’s hard times. Journal of Community Psychology, 38, 769–780.
Ullman, S. (2011). Is disclosure of sexual trauma helpful? Comparing experiential
laboratory versus field study results. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment, &
Trauma, 20, 148–162.
Ullman, S., Foynes, M., & Tang, S. (2010). Benefits and barriers to disclosing sexual
trauma: A contextual approach. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 11, 127–133.
Wilson, J., Drozdek, B., & Turkovic, S. (2006). Posttraumatic shame and guilt.
Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 7, 122–141.
Yellow Horse Brave Heart, M. (2003). The historical trauma response among Natives
and its relationship with substance abuse: A Lakota illustration. Journal of
Psychoactive Drugs, 35, 7–13.

View publication stats