Nunavut MLAs concerned about territory’s high birth rate, taboo around accessing reproductive health services
“If we are not preparing, we are going to be hit like a tsunami”
Cathy Towtongie, MLA for Rankin Inlet North–Chesterfield Inlet, says she’s concerned about how Nunavut’s high birth rate will affect such things as the territory’s housing shortage. She also asked the health minister about the government’s work to address the high number of births each year. (File photo)
Two Nunavut MLAs recently voiced their concerns about Nunavut’s growing population and the reasons behind it.
Nunavut has the highest birth rate in Canada. At 22.6 per cent live births per 1,000 people in 2018, Nunavut’s birth rate is double the national average of 10.1 per cent.
“The birth of a baby is great news, but what are they all going to do?” Cathy Towtongie, MLA for Rankin Inlet North–Chesterfield Inlet, said on Feb. 20 during the legislative assembly’s committee of the whole review of the 2020-21 budget for the Department of Health.
“We have a chronic housing shortage and we do have a social net income support, but into the long-term vision, when I ask Nunavummiut, I get concerned because I see children becoming parents while they’re children and being unable to parent at that time and getting into relationships when they’re not prepared,” Towtongie told the committee.
Towtongie asked Health Minister George Hickes if the Nunavut government has done outreach activities with the territory’s schools around family planning and reproductive health.
“We have to be realistic as the population of Nunavut that if we are not preparing, we are going to be hit like a tsunami,” she said.
While Hickes noted that Towtongie’s question about school outreach might be better directed to the education minister, he said local health centres offer reproductive and sexual health programming.
“It can be difficult … but as a health example, when a child goes into the health centre, it is not always easy to have that conversation in front of their parents. That is why our health staff get trained on how to get messages from the kids if they want to meet with the health-care professional by themselves,” Hickes said.
As for Nunavut’s sexual education curriculum, Hickes noted that at different grade levels, students are introduced to “different concepts of contraception, puberty, healthy relationships, consent, story lines are developed to help align with the Department of Education’s reading program.”
Following Towtongie’s line of questioning, John Main, MLA for Arviat North–Whale Cove, said he believed some of the curriculum in question is “outdated by decades.”
“In terms of what my colleague was asking and taking a government-wide look at this and the impact it has on the bottom line, and the topic of family planning and planned parenthood, become a parent but make sure it happens when you’re ready for it, whose responsibility is that within the government, planned parenthood?” Main asked.
Hickes said the issue is a shared responsibility among all departments depending on what the topic is, including Family Services, Education and Health.
Main also directed questions to Hickes about access to contraception in the territory, adding that it can often be taboo for young women in small communities to access sexual health services like birth control.
“For young women who want to access contraception, is there a way for them to access it where they don’t have to set foot into a health centre at the community level?”
Hickes said he was not aware of an alternative, but that “it is nobody’s business” why someone visits a health-care professional.
“We’ve got to break down these taboos. Who cares why somebody is going to the health centre?” Hickes said.
But Main said it’s not that simple.
“I agree it isn’t anybody’s business, but trying to change that behaviour and tell people to stop gossiping or stop being nosy is going to be pretty difficult,” he said.
If there isn’t a way to access sexual health services without going to a health centre, Main asked whether nurses visit schools so students can consult with them privately.
Hickes said health-care professionals usually visit the schools by invitation, apart from dentists and audiologists.
“That would maybe be something worth talking about with the supervisor of health programs in the health centre and maybe the DEA or the principal of a school specifically to look at what options can be available. I’m sure the health-care staff would be open to it,” Hickes said.
“taboo for young women”?
What about the young men who have sex with the young women? Why should the women bear the brunt of the responsibility of planned parenting?
It’s time we have mandatory reproductive and sexual health education for both young men and women
get with the times!
Absolutely, it has to be about educating and having expectations of both young men and young women. Fault doesn’t lie with young women for “getting” pregnant by a man. But how many single fathers are there in Nunavut that have had children by many women and raise them all alone? Treating men and women equally is certainly an ideal goal, but in reality, young women are bearing the brunt of responsibility for having and raising children. No fault is suggested here, just an honest consideration of what’s happening. Young men should absolutely be protecting themselves and their partners, but in the case of pregnancy, there is nothing more effective (abstinence aside), where condoms aren’t used, than the birth control pill. Also birth control is a form of long term planning, something that is ironic given the context of this discussion – birth control assumes a longer term horizon than one-time-use condoms do. Family planning 101. Let’s get nurses or CHRs to visit high schools on the monthly basis, have roundtable discussions with small breakout groups of students, let them ask questions and get informed answers, without having to go to the health centre and make an appointment (which the receptionist sometimes asks the reason for…), or in some cases, get parental permission if under a certain age, to access birth control medication. Think progressively here about what will help empower young people to easily make good decisions about their futures.
Perhaps this is something that should be talked about to every patient at the health center. It is not only the kids that are having sex that need this information. tell parents as well (even when the kids aren’t there) this is not about stopping adults from having large families it is about encouraging kids to be safe so your 15 year old does not become a parent. and give contraception to the parents to give to their kids. because if the adult does not want their child to become a parent then they can encourage safety.
But that will only work for those that dont encourage their children or grandchildren to get pregnant.
I applaud you for having the guts to bring this up, Cathy! Ajungi!
Cathy consistently raises tough tough issues that no one seems to want to consider or look at head on. Quvianakuni Cathy, you continue to impress me with your bravery to talk about these issues. We need more MLAs and regular community members to be thinking of these things and trying to ask questions – Hickes’ shluffing off to another department doesn’t work for me. I like the comment above and MLA Main’s suggestion about nurses going to schools. These are the discussions we have to have to bring some sunlight in to these dark corners! Keep up the good work on difficult topics, Cathy!
Even though I agree with the general message, cathy is always out to blame the poor as if they’re a problem. She just scratches the surface by saying “look what these young women are doing!” instead of asking why they’re doing it and how can we help.
I was very disappointed when the middle school sent home a letter in the past giving me the option to not allow my daughter into sex education. This option is part of the problem. Parents shouldn’t be given the option to prevent their kids from learning sex ed.
There is a taboo around birth control, the young girls need to be taught that its OK to use contraceptives. Also abortions are available, another taboo.
It’s a societal problem if people care that someone is getting prescribed birth control. There shouldn’t be any kind of stigma that a woman is using the pill or other method.
Of course there’s the religious stigma, which is why religions should keep their noses out of reproductive rights.
In some Communities Community Health Representatives are not welcomed to the Schools to teach about Health. Some people think if you teach children about Tobacco, Sex ed. or Substance that they will experiment and get it to those. The CHR’s need support from the Government.
There is a cultural bias towards large families given that infant and child mortality rates have traditionally been very high (and are still higher than they should be compared to the rest of Canada). Adult lifespans have also been relatively short requiring Inuit to have a high birth rate in order to survive.
.
Along with that there is the cultural role of women, where their most important role is to birth and raise children. Girls and young women see the role played by women and aspire to that role to increase their own self esteem.
.
Last would be the effect of Christian religions, which generally discourage the open discussion of sex and family planning.
.
Given the above factors it’s going to be difficult to break the cycle of kids having kids, and adults having more kids than they can support. It is important, but I don’t see the GN as having the fortitude to take on this issue.
People should not be having kids they can’t afford, period, and it’s good to see Towtongie raising this critical issue (she hit the nail more squarely on the head in another article published elsewhere, she must have been too accurate in her full comments for the Nunatsiaq News’s sensibilities). Contrary to what other commenters have said, family sizes are too large for a territory like Nunavut that has few employment opportunities, there are not enough for the size of the population it currently has (even if all of those people wanted to work and kept their jobs). Plus Nunavut is getting on the anti-development bandwagon that the activists are steering them obediently towards, which means even less means to support large families and a rapidly growing population.
So what level of finances is required to have kids? Also money is not what makes good parents anyway. there are plenty of parents that did not have much money but raised incredible kids that are now a very productive members of Nunavut.
This conversation should not be about who can have kids and who can not. It should be about acknowledging that we are moving in a modern age and need to encourage our children to grow and learn so that once they want to have a family and put energy into their own children they are able to make a well informed decision to do so.
Family sizes are not to large… with mining that is currently happening in Nunavut there are enough jobs for everyone from Nunavut to work there, and more from the south would still be needed. we dont need smaller families what we need is more housing and more opportunities for training. We need so much housing that having children is not considered an incentive so you get a house.
and we need the housing quick so lets get some quick build housing (like the QIA hotel in Iqaluit) in every community.
why are we banking on short lived mining jobs and careers to sustain this population?! the original comment said there’s more jobs at mines than everyone in Nunavut could work at….do you seriously think all Inuit and Nunavummiut WANT to work at a mine camp for 2/3 to 1/2 of their lives?? 2 weeks in 2 weeks out…that means a parent is present for 1/2 of their kids life for as long as they work at a mine. They miss hunting, they miss town events….when will we start expecting Nunavummiut to get university or college education and fill all these GN jobs?? Our young people shouldn’t only be aspiring to fill mining roles. That’s a farce, and is insulting to an Indigenous population. NGOs don’t steer this population to be anti-development. Not benefitting from mining, and seeing Inuit employment rates hover around 25% should be indication enough that something about mining isn’t registering with people here. Camp life has impacts on communities and families that no one wants to consider. Not to discount mining employment entirely – absolutely its an essential part of the current economy. But looking to mining to be the saviour for employment rates in the future is just too shortsighted, and blaming decisions that go against development on ngos is weak.
Kids having kids has been a huge problem for a long time. 30 years ago it was not such a big deal and parents and grandparents were actually happy about the news even if the girl was very young, as young as 11/12 years of age. Not so much anymore. With overcrowded housing and crazy prices the prospect of yet another mouth to feed is changing the mindsets of parents and grandparents faced with teenage girls coming home pregnant and forget about the boys who father the kids. They are about as much help as tits on a bull as the saying goes. Sex Ed in schools definitely needs to be stepped up and young and older people need to stop filling kids heads with drivel when it comes to birth control. It is alarming when you hear young people talk about it. They are pretty sure that all of it is unnatural, will give them cancer, will cause them to grow horns. make them sterile etc…. and won’t use it. And then of course there’s all the superstitions around birth control on top of it. Our little communities can’t handle the surge in population but people will still expect the government to pay for them and the babies they keep producing in the way of housing, SA, childtax etc….. but god forbid they take a job. Some plan to have additional kids until they max out what they can collect in Child Tax and SA. We have an older generation of welfare recipients who’s kids learned how to be welfare recipients and are currently giving birth to more welfare recipients. God help them if the public teat goes dry.
You clearly know what u r talking about CC. U identified & summarised the NU birthing issue exactly. GN top dogs (I use that reference lightly) should be consulting you on a remedy.
The birth rate in Nunavut is an issue and it’s known for a long time. This time however it is the first time I hear a MLA speaking about it in the cabinet. Should there be a concern? Yes! If a family does not have sufficient incomes to purchase food and clothing for their children, this is an issue.
Parents have responsibilities and can’t just push this away and blame the Department of Health, the Department of Education, or the Nunavut Housing Corporation. You cannot expect that housing is provided for free (basically), to cash in your child tax checks and to move on with your life. Most of their time, children are at home and it is expected that parents educate their children about sexuality and other life important topics.
Too many potential careers, future leaders of Nunavut are almost destroyed if a 12 yer old girl has a child an obviously, it is impossible to receive any support from the father, young or old.
However, what could be considered a solution? Allowing children only for families with an appropriate income? NO! Creating a one-child policy like China did? NO! Setting an age limit? YES?
Education starts at home and parents need to step it up. Talk to your children, don’t lose their trust in you, accompany your daughter/son when going to health facilities, or quite simple, just care!
The housing crisis will never end, it will get worse and there never ever will be enough jobs in Nunavut for all Nunavumiut. Mines are here temporary, and with some of the roadblocks they are facing, the attraction can wear of quickly. Your future, the future of your children and the future of Nunavut is in your hands; take advantage of it
there are confounding factors that come along with large families. one of them is the number of people who, with their large family, end up living in abject poverty, unable to feed children (literally), not sending children to school (because they are hungry), gambling hundreds of income support and child tax dollars away, failing to provide the necessities of care (medical, cleanliness etc.)…at some point, these major concerns must be seen for what they are, a form of child abuse. And at that point, will Family Services have the balls to intervene? When will children who aren’t being fed or whose laundry cannot be washed, or who’s eyes have never been checked, or who are never registered for school (or do not attend), or who are given snuff at age 3, or marijuana at 6, be removed from homes? If someone cannot look after them properly, providing the basics of care, how can the children be left and allowed to suffer???????????? living conditions are abhorrent for far too many kids. too many issues. no solutions. my heart breaks for them.