Highlights from a study about housing policies and 2SLGBTQI+ families
Family lens: Family Identity
Research Snapshot: Newcomer Women’s Experiences of Intimate Partner Violence in Canada
Highlights from a study about newcomer women’s experiences of family violence
Research Snapshot: Families with Refugee Backgrounds Rebuilding New Lives in Saskatchewan
Highlights of a study on what contributed to refugees’ resilience after resettling in Regina, Saskatchewan
Research Snapshot: The State of LGBTQIA2S+ Military Family Research in Canada
Issue Brief: Families, Disability, and Wellbeing in Canada
An overview of the wellbeing of families with disabilities in Canada
Research Snapshot: Peer and Family Belongingness Impact on the Mental Health of Black LGBTQ+ Youth
Highlights from a study about family support and Black LGBTQ+ youth
Research Snapshot: Inuit Mothers’ Visions for Child and Family Wellness in Nunavut, Canada
Summary of a study on how the child welfare system is perceived by Inuit mothers
Research Snapshot: Family Experiences and Anti-Black Racism in Early Childhood Education
Summary of a study on how anti-Black racism affects Black Canadians in early childhood
Polyamorous Families Have Broadened Family Law
An overview of research on polyamorous families in Canada
UN Report: Interlinkages Between Demographic Change, Migration, and Urbanization in Canada: Policy Implications
An overview of policy implications on demographic change, migration, and urbanization in Canada
Research Snapshot: Gaps in Employment Protections for Pregnant Migrants in Canada
Summary of a study on women who were pregnant or gave birth while having precarious immigration status
Research Snapshot: Homelessness Among Newcomer Families in Canada
Summary of a study on homelessness among immigrant families
Knowledge Snapshot: Perspectives of Indigenous Families on Early Learning and Childcare in Urban Settings
Summary of a study on Indigenous families’ thoughts on early learning and childcare in urban settings
Research Snapshot: “Family Stories” and Intergenerational Voices of Adoption
A summary of a study on the effects of adoption in adulthood
Research Snapshot: Spousal Bereavement and Adjustment Among Older Chinese Immigrants
A summary of a study on bereavement among immigrant families
Research Snapshot: Immigrant Men, Racism, and Family Wellbeing in Canada
Highlights from a study exploring the impact of the migration process in Canada on family wellbeing
Research Snapshot: Housing Affordability and Homeownership Among Immigrant Families in Canada
Key findings from a study on immigrant families and housing
Research Snapshot: Family Victimization of Sexual and Gender Minority Youth in Canada
Highlights from a study about LGBTQ2S+ youth victimized by family
Research Snapshot: Urban Indigenous Perspectives on Juggling Paid Work and Unpaid Care for Elders
Highlights from a study exploring the experiences of employed Indigenous caregivers
Research Snapshot: Young People Negotiating Transnational Family Relationships
Findings from a study on relationships in migrant families after reunification
Research Snapshot: Migrant Families’ Perspectives on Caregiving and Community Support in Canada
Findings from a study on caregiving experiences of newcomer families in Canada
Metrics to Meaning: Gender Diversity and Families in Canada
An overview of Census changes that strengthen our portrait of diversity
Migration and Urbanization Trends and Family Wellbeing in Canada: A Focus on Disability and Indigenous Issues
A report prepared for Expert Group Meeting on megatrends and families
Research Snapshot: Parent–Child Separations Among First Nations and Métis Families
A summary of a recent study on the impact of parent–child separations on First Nations families
Disability, Work Mobility, and Support from “Family” (Families, Mobility, and Work)
Insights from lived experience on disability, mobility, and support.
Family, Mobility, and Anti-Black Racism in 20th-Century Montreal (Families, Mobility, and Work)
A historical account of the work mobility and family lives of Black railway porters in 20th-century Montreal.
Research Snapshot: Overrepresentation of Black Children in Ontario’s Child Welfare System
Highlights from a study exploring child welfare workers’ thoughts on the overrepresentation of Black children in child welfare
Research Snapshot: Access to Postnatal Healthcare and Supports Among Syrian Refugee Mothers
Findings from a study on the postnatal experiences of Syrian refugee mothers in Canada.
Research Snapshot: Child Welfare, Race, and Family Reunification in Quebec
Findings from a study on the impacts of race on family reunification.
Research Snapshot: Indigenous Doula Care and the Revitalization of Indigenous Knowledge
A summary of a qualitative study on perinatal and childbirth experiences of Indigenous mothers.
Research Snapshot: Childbearing and Birth Experiences in Polyamorous Families
A summary of results from the POLYamorous Childbearing and Birth Experiences Study.
COVID-19 IMPACTS: Newcomer and Refugee Mothers in Canada – Final Report
Final report on COVID-19 IMPACTS: Newcomer and Refugee Mothers in Canada survey.
Timeline: 50 Years of Families in Canada (1971‑2021)
Learn about how families and family experiences in Canada have changed over the past 50 years with our new timeline!
Metrics to Meaning: Capturing the Diversity of Couples in Canada
Kathya Aathavan measures the growing diversity of couple relationships in Canada.
Celebrating Chosen Family Within the LGBTQ+ Community
Gaby Novoa
February 18, 2021
This February 22, 2021 is Chosen Family Day, a national observance of the significant relationships among those in the LGBTQ+ community.1, 2 Families formed by choice, and with intention, play a vital role in the lives of many LGBTQ+ people, where close relationships provide care, affirmation and a sense of belonging.
Research shows that marginalization due to one’s sexual orientation or gender identity has been linked to higher rates of family rejection, mental health challenges, substance abuse and exposure to violence among LGBTQ+, compared with their heterosexual and/or cisgender counterparts.3 These vulnerabilities are further amplified for those with intersectional identities, such as one’s race, class, religion or dis/abilities. Chosen families, friendships and positive community connections are therefore essential, as social connectedness is a key factor in well-being and resilience.4
Chosen families face more barriers yet serve many of the same functions of biological families
Fondation Émergence, a non-profit organization in Quebec that supports and serves the LGBTQ+ community through education and awareness-building, champions the importance of chosen family.5 Julien Rougerie, Program Manager with the organization, asserts that the roles within chosen and biological families are often identical: providing love, support, care and connections.
The difference for family who are not blood-related, however, is that their roles are often impeded by more barriers, such as the lack of formal recognition of such ties as valid or “legitimate.” Research has shown, for example, that LGBTQ+ seniors in long-term care homes are sometimes not able to get access or certain permissions for their loved ones when protocols and regulations are not inclusive to those who do not fall under “traditional” conceptualizations of a family member. Moreover, the fear of disclosing one’s sexual orientation can sometimes prevent an individual from identifying their partner or spouse. When institutions, such as health care or long-term care systems, do not acknowledge these diverse family formations, they block pathways of necessary care and connection.
One study found that, apart from their partner, 59% of lesbian, gay and bisexual adults aged 50 and over indicated that friends are the first people they contact in emergencies, whereas only 9% say that they contact a “family member.”6 Rougerie notes that LGBTQ+ older adults commonly share experiences of estrangement or distance from their biological families, as they grew up in sociocultural and political contexts in which there existed more stigma and sanctions around queerness. Reliance and interdependence with chosen family therefore take on additional significance among LGBTQ+ older adults, whose chosen family often become their caregivers in later life.
Chosen family and well-being are interconnected
In preparing for Chosen Family Day, the Vanier Institute asked people who identify as LGBTQ+ to share what these connections mean to them. Many of the responses and reflections highlighted themes of solace, security and strength:
“Chosen family is moving forward in my life. It’s feeling like I have agency in the experience of fraternity, trust and companionship. It’s building networks that are strong, like the points and spirals on a spider web.”
“To me, chosen family is the community of support with which you surround yourself. It’s the relationships you hold closest – whatever their nature is – and where you feel unquestionably at home.”
“Chosen family is wholehearted, wholesome, safe, strength, shared resources, shared emotions, uplifting habits, community, shared creation (such as through food), communion and ritual.”
“For me, chosen family is a group of people that you can turn to when you face hardships or have something to celebrate, and they can be there for you without judgement, especially when it comes to queer aspects of life such as dating or gender identity. It’s not really about seeing each other all the time or even being best friends, it’s knowing that you can confide and find comfort in someone and be assured that they love you AND your queerness, not despite it.”
“Chosen family mean there’s always an extra chair, and it’s for you.”
“Chosen family to me is reclaiming something that you didn’t have before.”
“Having a chosen family is an extension of self-love. The active choice to surround myself with people who love and support me is the most significant way that I can appreciate and value myself.”
“Chosen family is like a big family gathering but without uncomfortable chairs, heavy air (heavy with secrets) and weird unspoken rules about when to speak. Instead, we are talking about a web of people who bob in and out of my life. I look to them and they look out for me. It’s not all smooth sailing – they teach me hard lessons (like how to avoid jealousy and how to deal with grief). In the light moments and in the rough ones, I’m so grateful for my chosen family.”
“Chosen family is a place without judgement. It’s where you feel safe and true to yourself. It’s a place ‘where you don’t have to shrink yourself, to pretend or to perform.’”7
“Chosen family are those who help you sustain an environment of peace where you can show up as your authentic self.”
“To me a chosen family is one connected above all by trust and a kind of loyalty that is easy because it recognizes and anticipates change and growth.”
Special thanks to all those who took the time to share.
Responses have been edited for punctuation.
Gaby Novoa, Families in Canada Knowledge Hub, Vanier Institute of the Family
Notes
- Friends of Ruby – an organization focused on supporting the progressive well-being of LGBTQI2S youth through social services and housing – launched Chosen Family Day in February 2020. Link: https://www.friendsofruby.ca/.
- Nathan Battams, “In Conversation: Lucy Gallo on Chosen Family Day and LGBTQI2S Youth,” The Vanier Institute of the Family (February 2020).
- Jonathan Garcia et al., “Social Isolation and Connectedness as Determinants of Well-Being: Global Evidence Mapping Focused on LGBTQ Youth,” Global Public Health (October 2019). Link: https://bit.ly/3p8BCMg.
- Ibid.
- Fondation Émergence. Link: https://bit.ly/3aeMS5F.
- Fondation Émergence, “Ensuring the Good Treatment of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Older Adults” (2018). Link: https://bit.ly/3jKQsaQ.
- The quoted words are lyrics from the song “Family” by Blood Orange.
Families in Canada Adapting: My Family’s COVID Journey
While COVID-19 has affected families across Canada and the social, economic, cultural and environmental contexts that impact their well-being, it hasn’t stopped family life by any means. Whether it’s managing work–family responsibilities, connecting to celebrate milestones or providing support in difficult times, people are finding diverse and creative ways to keep doing what families do.
As families in Canada continue to manage these transitions, the Vanier Institute is gathering, compiling and sharing these “stories behind the statistics” to provide insights and into family strengths, resilience and diverse experiences across the country.
Edward Ng, PhD
(July 23, 2020) March 16, 2020 ended up being not just another Monday. While this was the first official day of spring break for public school students in Ontario, the school board suddenly announced that the break would be instead two weeks, which was later extended until further notice. Inadvertently, some 2 million Ontario public school students – including my younger daughter, who is in Grade 9 – started a long journey of distance learning from home as a result of the pandemic.
Family home suddenly becomes school and shared workspace
The night before, I had also been asked not to report to work at my office near downtown Ottawa due to public health measures aimed at preventing the spread of the coronavirus. At the same time, my older daughter, a university student, was told that classes would move online, as the campus began to shut down.
Among my family of four, only my wife continued to leave home for work. However, after a case of COVID-19 was reported at her workplace in late March, everyone was then asked to work from home from then on, a decision that would have been unimaginable before the pandemic began. I began to wonder if this was the beginning of the end of an office-centric era, with huge implications for work and family.
Though we have an Internet connection, our home setting is not equipped to be a home office and/or a home school. Since my wife works in a sector dealing with clients over the phone, I quickly rearranged a room to set up a temporary office for her. My younger daughter, after an extended spring break, soon started to receive daily instruction and lessons from her teachers online, which meant all four of us were now using a single Internet connection almost constantly. Ultimately, we’ve had to contact our Internet service provider to upgrade our hardware, which mitigated our problems and frustrations – and the demand for me to become an Internet technologist!
Reflecting on experiences and emotions through music
In May, two months into the lockdown, my daughter was asked by her Grade 9 music teacher to select some songs that reflected her emotional state while learning from home. She chose “Stayin’ Alive” by the Bee Gees. I was surprised since she is not of the era of the Bees Gees, who were famous in my birthplace of Hong Kong when I was growing up. This upbeat disco hit of the late 1970s was described by one of the songwriters as actually being rather serious in its focus – it is about survival1 when life is “goin’ nowhere.”
Life goin’ nowhere, somebody help me
Somebody help me, yeah
Life goin’ nowhere, somebody help me, yeah
I’m stayin’ alive
It’s a cry for survival that resonated with my daughter’s experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic, with her feelings and concerns regarding the virus amplified as a visible minority2 teen.3 I admired her perseverance as she avoided venturing out as much as possible throughout the lockdown. But she also felt hopeful: the second song she chose was “Let’s Go Fly a Kite” from Mary Poppins, reflecting her anticipation of going out without fearing COVID-19.
Care and concern across generations
Like the majority of Canadians, I am more concerned about my family contracting COVID-19 than myself, and surveys have consistently shown that visible minorities experience both of these concerns at higher rates than those who are not visible minorities.4, 5 Like many families, my care and concerns extend across generations, to older and younger generations.
My university-aged daughter works as a part-time cashier at a neighbourhood pharmacy. Each shift, she ventures out to her essential job, and we were concerned about the risk of being infected with COVID-19 through her exposure to customers. In mid-April, she came down with a fever and dry cough, which are some of the possible symptoms. We were worried, and encouraged her to self-isolate by taking a leave of absence to ensure she was not positive. As soon her symptoms subsided, she returned to work, only to find her workplace had been transformed, with plexiglass installed at the cash to minimize the risk of infection. One time, she reported a scary moment when a client, while paying for the purchase, kept on coughing at the plexiglass without any concern for others!
For about three years, my mother-in-law has been staying in a long-term care home in Toronto, and we visited her whenever we went to the city. Given that these care homes in Ontario and Quebec have become the epicentre for COVID-19, we became very nervous for her. In fact, we found out that a resident at her care home was tested positive in mid-May, which indicated an outbreak, according to the local public health authority. Further investigation was conducted of staff and residents, with encouraging results that contradicted the original findings. We were relieved when the Public Health Authority withdrew its order of outbreak for the facility.
With the Ontario ruling that no visitations were allowed at these care homes at the early stage of the pandemic, we could only use online communication, such as Skype, to stay connected through virtual visits. The workers there at the care home have told us that the residents there have been bored during the pandemic and welcome these virtual visits. Now that Ontario is starting to allow visitors into nursing homes, we are making plans for a physical visit, which still needs to respect social distancing protocol.
Care and concern across borders
I experienced concerns for my family prior to the declaration of the COVID-19 pandemic. Back in February, my relatives who were visiting from East Asia decided to leave Toronto to return home to Hong Kong before Air Canada cancelled all direct flights. During that time, COVID-19 was affecting that part of Asia severely and I had suggested they stay longer in Toronto, but they decided to go. To soothe my own worry, I searched around and managed to purchase some non-surgical masks for them to use in Hong Kong. (Note that, at that time, in mid to late-February, face masks were hard to find for purchase, even in Ontario.)
In hindsight, however, my relatives felt that they had made the right decision to leave, as COVID-19 cases began to increase in Toronto and as airports started to close in Canada. Interestingly, they are now back in Toronto for their annual summer visit to Canada, just as a COVID-19 outbreak is occurring in Hong Kong.
Perhaps due to my close connection to Asia, I was quite concerned about COVID-19 before it became a household name in Canada. I vividly recall how SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome)6 hit my homeland as well as Toronto in 2003. So, as early as February of this year, near the beginning of the outbreak in Asia, I had closely followed the development of this emerging virus, which was impacting families all around the world.
Time for family memories and conversations
Thinking of the song “Let’s Go Fly a Kite” brings back memories of when my daughters were young, when we would often do this together in a nearby park.7 We would spend a lot of time talking and laughing together, and once the kite caught the wind, we would follow along and enjoy watching it soar into the sky.
As they have grown to become more independent over the years, and I focused on my own work and other involvements, there are usually few opportunities for these kinds of moments. But the pandemic has reminded me to spend time with them – and provided some opportunities to do so – before they graduate onto the next stage of life. Thankfully, the “lockdown” has allowed us time, as a family, to have some meaningful discussion about matters important to life. For that, I am thankful.
Edward Ng, PhD, is an analyst at the Vanier Institute of the Family.
Notes
- Interestingly, “Stayin’ Alive” has been used to train medical professionals to provide the right number of chest compressions per minute while performing CPR, since its tempo of close to 104 beats per minute falls within the recommended 100–120 chest compressions per minute recommended by the British Heart Foundation while performing the life-saving procedure.
- “Visible minority” refers to whether a person belongs to a visible minority group as defined by the Employment Equity Act and, if so, the visible minority group to which the person belongs. The Employment Equity Act defines visible minorities as “persons, other than Aboriginal peoples, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour.” Categories in the visible minority variable include South Asian, Chinese, Black, Filipino, Latin American, Arab, Southeast Asian, West Asian, Korean, Japanese, Visible minority (i.e. “not included elsewhere”), Multiple visible minorities and Not a visible minority. According to the 2016 Census of Canada, close to 70% of the visible minorities are born outside Canada (69%).
- According to a survey by the Vanier Institute of the Family, the Association for Canadian Studies and Experiences Canada conducted from April 29 to May 5, 2020, more than half (52%) of visible minority youth said they were somewhat or very afraid of catching COVID-19, compared with 34% of those who are not visible minorities. Link: https://bit.ly/3jlmZn3.
- More than 6 in 10 surveyed visible minorities (62%) said they were afraid of contracting COVID-19, but 73% were even more fearful for family members to get the virus, compared with 54% and 66%, respectively, among those who are not visible minorities.
- A survey by the Vanier Institute of the Family, the Association of Canadian Studies and Leger, conducted May 1–3, 2020, included 1,526 Canadians 18 years of age or older, randomly recruited from LEO’s online panel. Using data from the 2016 Census, results were weighted according to gender, age, mother tongue, region, education level and presence of children in the household in order to ensure a representative sample of the population. No margin of error can be associated with a non-probability sample (Web panel, in this case). However, for comparative purposes, a probability sample of 1,526 respondents would have a margin of error of ±2.51%, 19 times out of 20.
- Severe acute respiratory (SARS) is a respiratory disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV or SARS-CoV-1), which resulted in approximately 300 deaths in Hong Kong and more than 40 deaths in Canada during the 2002–2004 SARS outbreak.
- “Let’s Go Fly a Kite” is from the Walt Disney classic Mary Poppins, featured at the end of the film when George Banks (played by David Tomlinson), realizes that his family is more important than his job, and decides to take his family on a kite-flying outing.
Published on July 23, 2020
In Conversation: Lucy Gallo on Access, Adaptation and Resilience Among LGBTQI2S Youth
Gaby Novoa
June 29, 2020
The financial, physical and mental well-being of LGBTQI2S communities in Canada has been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. A national survey found that 42% of the LGBTQI2S community reported significant impacts on their mental health amid the crisis, compared with 30% of non-LGBTQI2S people.
On June 23, 2020, we connected with Lucy Gallo, Youth Services and Housing Director of Friends of Ruby, to learn about how LGBTQI2S youth in Toronto have been navigating the past few months, and how their organization has adapted to continue to serve and support these youth.
Tell us about how Friends of Ruby has adapted and reacted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic to continue serving and supporting LGBTQI2S youth.
We closed our drop-in on a Friday and, on the Monday, our counsellors were on the phone connecting with our youth – they jumped right into service and care. Counsellors quickly moved online and have been offering – and are still quite busy doing – phone sessions and video sessions, and we are excited to have just launched a chat counselling program. All staff have now been fully trained to also provide counselling through chat.
We realized there were youth who still live with their families, some of whom they’re not out to, and so they did not have private space to access counselling over the phone. This chat option is now giving them the opportunity to be able to access support, with maybe their parents thinking they’re just texting a friend. This was a feature that we have always wanted to do but never went there because we didn’t have the resources. So, COVID made the push and provided the opportunity to say “we have to react to this right now.” I quickly got the staff trained in two half-days, and they can continue to receive assistance by someone experienced in chat counselling.
As our drop-in program wasn’t available to the youth we serve, one of the themes that we heard in conversations with them at the beginning of the pandemic was the difficulty of accessing food. We responded by providing gift cards, and we were also able to send meals in partnership with an organization, which allowed us to deliver two meals a week to some of our youth.
In adapting to the pandemic, we’ve also tried to provide virtual groups daily to allow youth to continue to have as much access to us as possible. It gave us a chance for people to come together online, connect and share what was going on in their lives. Our Black, Indigenous, People of Colour (BIPOC) discussion group has been a very important one to be running, especially given the amount of racism and what is happening right now in the world. It’s been a difficult time for Black youth. When Toronto started announcing that they were going to card people if they were outdoors when the pandemic first started, and that people could tell on others, a lot of BIPOC youth did not want to come out to the centre; they did not want to experience more racism. We’ve also added some extra check-in times, specifically with our Black staff to support our Black youth.
Some of the other programs we’ve been continuing to run include our art therapy group, virtual drop-ins, gaming and art for change. Also, with the support of the Centre for Mindfulness Studies, two of our counsellors successfully ran a group called Mindfulness-Based Skills for Coping with Stress and Anxiety.
We have begun moving to doing some in-person supports and opportunities for interaction as well. We’ve opened the drop-in again, operating under our own version of “phase two.” We’re providing essentials so people can come in to pick up things like takeaway meals, harm reduction kits, menstrual kits and more. They can now access case management in person – we’ve created a room with enough distance – and plexiglass – and we’ve set up the space in such a way that we could have at least up to six people right now. We’ve also realized that if a youth can’t access their counsellor from home or they don’t want to chat online, they can come to our space and have the privacy to connect with their counsellor virtually.
A lot of the services we’ve been developing or strengthening in the past few months will now also be available post-pandemic. The goal is to offer this new form of modality to all of our youth and also for youth anywhere in Canada who want to access our counselling and/or connect online.
Tell us about any common themes that you’ve observed during the pandemic among the LGBTQI2S youth you serve.
I think a big one is a sense of loneliness. With not being able to access our space, there was a lot of anxiety in the beginning around what does this all mean. How does this affect everyone? Not being able to have our regular sense of community has been difficult, especially when not all youth feel they have the privacy, space or safety at home with their families.
Tell us about some of the lessons you’ve learned while adapting Friends of Ruby to continue serving youth. Have there been any surprises or “aha” moments?
One thing that was interesting, and I’ll just use this as one example of many, is that if someone is experiencing suicidal ideation and you have them in the space, you can do an assessment and hopefully you can de-escalate, as you have them there safe with you. But what I realized was when you’re online and you don’t know where somebody is, how do you provide a sense of safety?
We had to quickly create documents and ask the youth to read them over first and agree to provide information on where they are – such as their address and how to contact them if the line gets disconnected. This protocol also applies in many cases. Even when running our virtual therapeutic groups, how do we know if it was just that someone’s line broke out and that they’re not upset – that they didn’t purposefully drop the call because of something in the group that upset them. So, these are just some of the “aha” moments. When you have someone in person, it’s such a different way of working. These were some of the things that we had to adopt and make available for everyone’s safety.
Tell us about any unique experiences and/or stories of adaptation or resilience from the youth you serve.
There’s been incredible resilience among our youth throughout all this. The folks that we’ve had trouble accessing have been our most transient youth, because they didn’t have contact information for us to reach them when we closed. Because they usually come to see us just by dropping in, being closed made that hard, although a couple of them did come in to say hi and to tell us they’re doing quite well. Obviously, we haven’t been able to see everyone, but the folks we have seen have been demonstrating lots of resilience and coping.
The counsellors have spoken about how a lot of the youth weren’t so sure about doing online counselling. However, one person, for example, has still been working during the pandemic and said they actually liked this option because they can commit to counselling without having to travel to and from the organization. It makes accessing counselling easier for some.
What do you hope to see or do you anticipate in the months ahead?
Right now, we’re planning on opening the drop-in a little bit more, as the city opens more things. The goal is that we will let more people into the space and hopefully foster a greater sense of community again. Each counsellor has a couple of people who are waiting to be seen in person. We’re looking at planning for those counsellors to come in, just to see the specific people who can’t or don’t want to do online counselling. For the BIPOC discussion group, we’re looking at running it virtually, but also in person.
People could come into the space during that time to be part of the group, while others are also connected virtually, so we can meet the needs of people both offline and online. As mentioned earlier, we’re looking to start running another round of Mindfulness-Based Skills for Coping with Stress and Anxiety, hopefully around mid-July. In the next few weeks, staff will continue to talk about the ways that we can expand, and we will continue on with takeaway meals and case management, in person and virtually.
Connect with Friends of Ruby on social media (Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn) to stay up to date as they continue to offer more services and programs.
Gaby Novoa, Families in Canada Knowledge Hub, Vanier Institute of the Family
This interview has been edited for length, flow and clarity.
Families New to Canada and Financial Well-being During Pandemic
Laetitia Martin
May 21, 2020
In 2015, the 193 Member States of the United Nations Organization, including Canada, adopted 17 sustainable development goals. Over a 15-year time frame, the plan aims to “end poverty, protect the planet and improve the lives and prospects of everyone, everywhere.”1 Eradicating poverty is ranked first because of the extreme vulnerability that it causes, especially in a time of crisis such as the pandemic that we are experiencing now.
Given this period of increased vulnerability, it is even more important to monitor the evolving economic situation and well-being of the most disadvantaged families. Whether one thinks of Indigenous, immigrant, single-parent or other types of families facing poverty, analyzing regularly updated data is vital to follow developments in the situation. In this way, our public decision makers will be able to implement effective policies and programs to reduce poverty, even in a time of crisis.
Based on data from the 2016 Census, almost 1 in 3 immigrant children (32.2%), one of the most economically vulnerable groups in the country, lives in poverty.2 What are the economic difficulties currently facing these families?
Three out of 10 immigrants had difficulty meeting their immediate financial obligations
In a time of pandemic, the entire population may experience financial losses, regardless of the prior level of economic vulnerability. Data collected during a recent survey conducted over a six-week period by the Vanier Institute of the Family, the Association for Canadian Studies and Leger show this clearly.3
Regardless of their immigrant status, nearly 4 to 5 out of 10 respondents stated that they had experienced a decrease in their income because of the pandemic. Immigrants were represented to a higher degree, however, among those for whom this decrease in income caused difficulty in meeting their short-term financial obligations (fig. 1). In the first weeks following implementation of social distancing measures, almost 3 out of 10 immigrants (29%) stated that they had difficulty paying their rent or mortgage due to the crisis. This was almost 1 out of 10 persons higher than their Canadian-born counterparts (20%). The gap appears likely to persist over the coming weeks.
Similarly, a greater proportion of foreign-born versus Canadian-born individuals experienced other short-term financial difficulties, such as paying bills on time. These financial stress indicators make the foreign-born population all the more vulnerable when they encounter difficulty meeting their basic needs, such as having a roof over their heads and accessing related public services, the minimum needed for their well-being and that of their family.
More than 1 out of 2 immigrant parents experienced a loss of income
Looking more closely at the economic impact of the crisis on immigrant families, one sees that the negative effects were immediate (fig. 2). In late March, more than 1 out of 2 immigrant parents stated that they had experienced a loss of income because of the pandemic, resulting in a reduced capacity to assist other family members financially. This support might not only have proven even more useful during this difficult time, but its decrease might also have a snowball effect within the most economically vulnerable ethnic communities.
Downward trends of immigrant parents experiencing immediate financial difficulties
On a more positive note, trends observed over recent weeks have shown a decrease in the proportion of immigrant parents who experienced immediate financial impacts. After reaching a high during the first week of April, the proportion of immigrant parents who had difficulty paying their rent or mortgage, as well as those who had difficulty meeting their other financial obligations, decreased by more than 15 percentage points in the following four weeks. While it is too early to determine the precise cause of the decrease, these results suggest that businesses that have adapted in an ongoing effort to maintain services despite distancing rules, coupled with the financial measures put in place by governments, may be helping lessen the economic vulnerability of immigrant families in the immediate term.
Financially vulnerable immigrant families visit the grocery store more often
Beyond direct financial impacts, economic vulnerability can also limit the ability to adopt certain behaviours that promote good health. For example, some parents of immigrant families may have to make difficult choices between the basic needs of their family and the resources they have to reduce their exposure to COVID-19. Furthermore, some economically vulnerable families do not have any credit cards to shop online, cannot pay the added cost imposed by grocery stores for delivery or packaging of items, or do not have the necessary financial resources to buy provisions to last them over several days. Not to mention that it might be more difficult for individuals without a car to transport a large amount of provisions on foot or on public transit.
These constraints might explain why twice as many immigrant parents who experienced immediate financial difficulties (46%) went to the grocery store more than once a week, compared with their Canadian-born counterparts, who had not experienced the same difficulties (23%) (fig. 3). No significant difference was observed between the two groups regarding compliance with other safety measures, such as social distancing and frequent hand washing, which suggests that this increased exposure cannot be explained by a lack of awareness.
In instituting sustainable development goals in 2015, the 193 States around the world recognized that “inequality threatens long-term social and economic development.”4 Often called a land of immigrants, Canada nevertheless remains a country in which immigrant families face a high risk of economic vulnerability. Data collected at the start of the pandemic show that inequalities persist in a time of crisis. Immigrants are harder hit financially in the immediate term than their Canadian-born counterparts.
Six weeks of collecting weekly data would seem to bear witness to a national resiliency or capacity to adapt to this extraordinary situation by mitigating certain negative effects. The downward trend in the prevalence of immigrant families that experienced difficulty paying their mortgage or rent, or meeting their other financial obligations, can be seen as a positive. But if the past weeks have taught us one lesson, it is that the situation changes rapidly in a time of pandemic. It is therefore more important than ever to closely monitor the situation and to be sure to identify, in a timely manner, the needs of the most vulnerable families, be they Indigenous, immigrant, single-parent or other. Eradicating poverty is an even greater challenge in a time of crisis.
Laetitia Martin, Vanier Institute on secondment from Statistics Canada
Notes
- United Nations Organization, “Sustainable Development Program,” Sustainable Development Goals. Link: https://bit.ly/35ZOi07.
- Statistics Canada, Data Products, 2016 Census, Data Tables, Statistics Canada catalogue no. 98-400-X2016206. Link: https://bit.ly/35Z1WAi.
- The survey, conducted by the Vanier Institute of the Family, the Association for Canadian Studies and Leger on March 10–13, March 27–29, April 3–5, April 10–12, April 17–19, April 24–26 and May 1–3, 2020, included approximately 1,500 individuals aged 18 and older, interviewed using computer-assisted web-interviewing technology in a web-based survey. All samples, with the exception of those from March 10–13 and April 24–26, also included booster samples of approximately 500 immigrants. Using data from the 2016 Census, results were weighted according to gender, age, mother tongue, region, education level and presence of children in the household in order to ensure a representative sample of the population. No margin of error can be associated with a non-probability sample (web panel in this case). However, for compahttps://bit.ly/3mQFdPdrative purposes, a probability sample of 1,512 respondents would have a margin of error of ±2.52%, 19 times out of 20.
- United Nations Organization, “Reduced Inequalities: Why It Matters,” Sustainable Goal #10: Reduced Inequalities. Link: https://bit.ly/3mQFdPd (PDF).
2018 UPDATE: A Snapshot of Military and Veteran Families in Canada
Download A Snapshot of Military and Veteran Families in Canada
Canada’s military and Veteran families are diverse, resilient and strong, and they are a source of pride for the country. They engage with – and play important roles in – their workplaces, communities and society as a whole.
The “military journey” is often characterized by mobility, absence and the risk of illness, injury or death. Professionals and practitioners can benefit from “military literacy” – an understanding of the unique experiences and lifestyle characteristics of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel, Veterans and their families. To enhance understanding of these families and their experiences, the Vanier Institute of the Family is highlighting new research and data1 on military and Veteran families in Canada with a 2018 update of A Snapshot of Military and Veteran Families in Canada.
Military families experience high mobility and frequent periods of separation
- Every year in Canada, an estimated 10,000 military families are relocated due to postings (8,000 of whom move to new provinces), which accounts for one-quarter of all Regular Forces personnel in Canada.
- In 2018, among surveyed CAF Regular Force members, nearly three in 10 (29%) reported that they had relocated at least four times due to military postings throughout their career.
- In 2017, two-thirds of Regular Forces personnel reported experiencing extended absences from their family.
Military children are affected by relocations, but they are resilient and most adjust quickly
- Research shows that while most military children do find relocation stressful, they are resilient, and this stress typically diminishes within a half-year after moving.
- In 2016, among surveyed CAF parents, only one in 10 (10%) reported that their child(ren) “had trouble adjusting after moving/relocation,” while nearly half (47%) did not experience any issues.
The majority of Veterans and their families do not experience difficulties in transition to civilian life
- In 2016, Veterans were more likely to report that the transition to civilian life was easy compared with those who said it was difficult for themselves and their families.
- 52% said the transition was “easy” for themselves, 32% said it was “difficult.”
- 57% said the transition was “easy” for their partners, 28% said it was “difficult.”
- 60% said the transition was “easy” for their children, 17% said it was “difficult.”
- Nearly nine in 10 Veterans reported being satisfied/very satisfied with life (86%) and their family (88%).
Note
- Source information can be found in the document.
Battams, N. (2018). 2018 Update: A snapshot of military and veteran families in Canada. The Vanier Institute of the Family. https://doi.org/10.61959/cyth4819e
What’s in a Name? Defining Family in a Diverse Society
Alan Mirabelli
Download this article in PDF format
For more than 50 years, the Vanier Institute of the Family has served as a national resource dedicated to exploring and understanding Canada’s diverse families. During this time, the Institute has sought to enhance and mobilize knowledge through research that documents the richness and complexity of families, family life, and family experiences, expectations and aspirations. A central component of this research has been the functional definition of family used by the Institute since the late 1980s.
The Vanier Institute defines a family as any combination of two or more persons who are bound together over time by ties of mutual consent, birth and/or adoption or placement, and who together assume responsibilities for variant combinations of some of the following: physical maintenance and care of group members; addition of new members through procreation, adoption or placement; socialization of children; social control of members; production, consumption, distribution of goods and services; and affective nurturance (i.e. love).
The Vanier Institute needed a definition that allowed people to have a discussion rather than an argument over what constituted a “family.” Inclusiveness was the key to achieving this; the definition needed to apply to everyone’s experience of family, regardless of their history, nationality, socio-economic status, ethno-racial background, sexual orientation or family type. But the definitions being used by organizations and individuals at the time tended to reflect the personal family of whoever was providing the definition. They were projecting their own experience of family into a public policy sphere or into a sociological or community discussion.
The Vanier Institute needed a definition that allowed people to have a discussion rather than an argument over what constituted a “family.” Inclusiveness was the key to achieving this.
This is understandable, as people’s perceptions of social institutions are shaped by their own upbringing and surroundings. But since families aren’t homogeneous (even in the Vanier Institute’s early years, when there was less diversity in the structure and composition of families than today), this approach to defining families left many out of the discourse, such as sole-support families, blended families and families with LGBTQ2I+ parents. Rather than focusing on what families look like, the Institute instead decided to create a definition based on what families do, regardless of the particular structure of the family or who performs roles within.
The deliberate broadness of the Vanier Institute’s definition of family sparked some controversy at first. After some of the Institute’s early documents were released, one of the first questions asked by members of the media was whether it included families with LGBTQ2I+ parents – and the answer was, without hesitation, yes. Yes, because the definition is about people who engage in the task of raising the next generation, regardless of who they are. This initial controversy may have been inevitable, but it was necessary if the Institute was going to take an inclusive approach.
The Vanier Institute’s definition is not about the status of the adults looking after the child. It’s a family if there is a set of relationships over time with individuals looking after the needs of another. It’s not about a marriage per se, but rather the commitment made – it could be common-law, sole-support or any number of family structures. The definition doesn’t require children, but it does require at least one relationship between an adult and another person – a relationship over time, which signifies that a commitment has been made. How it’s made and what specific form it takes is independent of the definition.
Rather than focusing on what families look like, the Vanier Institute instead decided to create a definition based on what families do.
It was in the years leading up to the 1994 International Year of the Family, as governments were searching for definitions of family for use in public policies that involved or affected families, that the value of the functional definition became clear. Up until this point, people were still trying to justify either a nuclear family or one that reflected their own familial experience, rather than trying to find a general approach that captures a better picture of all families. The Vanier Institute’s definition then started showing up in textbooks in the mid-1990s and has since become one of the most commonly cited definitions used in family research nationally.
The definition leads to interesting discussion when one realizes that all families (even if they happen to look alike) do the same things, we may just do them differently. One hundred years ago, people fed their families first by growing the food, then canning or preserving it, then cooking it and then finally serving it to other family members. In later generations, people fed their families by going to the store, buying the food, cooking it and then putting it on the table in front of family members. Now, we may also go to restaurants to buy prepared food and then eat it with our families. Today’s grocery stores, which are selling as much prepared food as raw ingredients, are the next iteration of how we’re feeding our families in a modern context. This shows that families can fulfill the same basic function of providing nourishment while doing so in different ways. It’s all just another way of saying that families are dynamic, constantly performing the same functions but adapting how they do so in response to ever-changing social, economic and cultural contexts.
This definition was also meant to show that the relationship between families and society is a two-way street. Families are shaped by and react to social, economic and cultural factors, but they have an impact on these same forces as well. They create changes at the micro level by making decisions about family aspirations, labour market participation (or the lack thereof) and the consumption of goods and services. Collectively, these changes over time create change at the macro level, as institutions and organizations react to patterns of behaviour among families. Families are not simply the recipient of policies, whether it’s government policies or employment policies – they engage, resist and/or modify them based on their immediate and personal needs. So there’s a constant negotiation and renegotiation between family and culture. They are agents of change, but at the same time they are compliant to the norms of culture to some extent.
“The Vanier Institute must be thoroughly in touch with family life of all kinds, not the ideal of the family but the reality of the family as people live it.”
– Beryl Plumptre (former Vanier Institute president), 1972
The Vanier Institute’s definition demonstrates that, throughout time, there is consistency in terms of what families do to the benefit of their members and to the benefit of society, which has an expectation that families are preparing young people for the economy and the society that they are going to encounter. Society benefits through the future contributions of children, who grow to become the next generation of employees, taxpayers and community members.
Due to its recognition that families are diverse, complex and dynamic, the Vanier Institute’s definition facilitates discussion about families and family life without pitting the interests of one family against another. This was a problem we regularly experienced before this definition was created – there were judgments being made about one type of family versus another due to their structure or composition, which was hurtful to the families being talked about and hurtful to our culture. As Dr. Elise Boulding once said, there isn’t enough love in the world for us to reject loving relationships, whatever their form. So, by looking at what families do, it’s easier to take an appreciative stance rather than a critical one, and it’s a reminder to the culture that when families and parents begin, the culture continues.
In a sense, all of those points in the definition don’t just describe family but also the community that surrounds the family. They have a role in every one of those functions because they pick up where the family leaves off. It’s a very inclusive definition for a reason – it’s a way of saying we all have a responsibility and it’s shared. We are creating not just individuals but also a culture through an agglomeration of families who are performing these tasks on behalf of the society.
Alan Mirabelli was a devoted member of the Vanier Institute team for more than 30 years, serving as Executive Director of Administration and Director of Communications. Alan Mirabelli passed away peacefully on December 20, 2017, at the age of 69. He was a dear friend, colleague and mentor who will be greatly missed by many. His contributions and legacy at the Vanier Institute of the Family will live on forever.
Originally published as a Transition article in December 2015.
Republished with updated biographic note on August 21, 2018.
What Does the Term “Military Family” Mean?
Download What Does the Term “Military Family” Mean? A Comparison Across Four Countries (PDF)
Defining “family” is important for family research and the provision of services, benefits and programs to Canadians and their loved ones. The same is true for military families, who have unique experiences that warrant focused attention from policy-makers and health officials, such as a higher degree of family mobility, separation and risk.1
In recent years, there has been significant growth in the body of research on military families – facilitated by organizations such as the Canadian Institute for Military and Veteran Health Research (CIMVHR) – that reveals significant variation between countries in how they determine who is included in their definition. This can have a significant impact on our understanding of military families, since the definitions used in research (and therefore the nature and subject of the research itself) often vary. It can also have a direct impact on these families, since definitions can control access to services and benefits through eligibility criteria.
Research shows that families play a crucial role in supporting the health and well-being of Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) personnel and, in turn, their contributions support CAF operational readiness – realities that have been highlighted by the National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman.2 However, definitions of “military family” used in international research vary, and much of the Canadian research adheres to “traditional” ideals of family structure despite the evolution and increasing diversification of families over the years.3
In 2017, the Vanier Institute of the Family partnered with CIMVHR and a variety of researchers from Canada and abroad to compare the different definitions of “military family” being used by researchers and policy-makers in other allied countries (United Kingdom, United States, Australia and Canada). The resulting report, What Does the Term “Military Family” Mean? A Comparison Across Four Countries, explores the impact of these definitions on research and access to services.
Download What Does the Term “Military Family” Mean? A Comparison Across Four Countries (PDF)
Published on August 1, 2018
Notes
- Learn more in A Snapshot of Military and Veteran Families in Canada. Link: https://bit.ly/31iMC09.
- National Defence and Canadian Forces Ombudsman, On the Homefront: Assessing the Well-being of Canada’s Military Families in the New Millennium (November 2013). Link: https://bit.ly/2LBVR57.
- Learn more in A Snapshot of Family Diversity in Canada. Link: https://bit.ly/39cRTuv.
Families in Canada Interactive Timeline
Today’s society and today’s families would have been difficult to imagine, let alone understand, a half-century ago. Data shows that families and family life in Canada have become increasingly diverse and complex across generations – a reality highlighted when one looks at broader trends over time.
But even as families evolve, their impact over the years has remained constant. This is due to the many functions and roles they perform for individuals and communities alike – families are, have been and will continue to be the cornerstone of our society, the engine of our economy and at the centre of our hearts.
Learn about the evolution of families in Canada over the past half-century with our Families in Canada Interactive Timeline – a online resource from the Vanier Institute that highlights trends on diverse topics such as motherhood and fatherhood, family relationships, living arrangements, children and seniors, work–life, health and well-being, family care and much more.
View the Families in Canada Interactive Timeline.*
Full topic list:
- Motherhood
o Maternal age
o Fertility
o Labour force participation
o Education
o Stay-at-home moms
- Fatherhood
o Family relationships
o Employment
o Care and unpaid work
o Work–life
- Demographics
o Life expectancy
o Seniors and elders
o Children and youth
o Immigrant families
- Families and Households
o Family structure
o Family finances
o Household size
o Housing
- Health and Well-Being
o Babies and birth
o Health
o Life expectancy
o Death and dying
View all source information for all statistics in Families in Canada Interactive Timeline.
* Note: The timeline is accessible only via desktop computer and does not work on smartphones.
Published February 8, 2018
A Snapshot of Family Diversity in Canada (February 2018)
Download A Snapshot of Family Diversity in Canada (February 2018).
For more than 50 years, the Vanier Institute of the Family has monitored, studied and discussed trends in families and family life in Canada. From the beginning, the evidence has consistently made one thing clear: there is no single story to tell, because families are as diverse as the people who comprise them.
This has always been the case, whether one examines family structures, family identities, family living arrangements, family lifestyles, family experiences or whether one looks at the individual traits of family members, such as their ethnocultural background, immigration status, sexual orientation or their diverse abilities.
Building on our recent infographic, Family Diversity in Canada (2016 Census Update), our new Statistical Snapshot publication provides an expanded and more detailed portrait of modern families in Canada, as well as some of the trends that have shaped our vibrant and evolving family landscape over the years. Based on current data and trend analysis, this overview shows that diversity is, was and will continue to be a key characteristic of family life for generations to come – a reality that contributes to Canada’s dynamic and evolving society.
Highlights include:
- According to Statistics Canada, there were 9.8 million Census families living across Canada in 2016.
- 66% of families in Canada include a married couple, 18% are living common-law and 16% are lone-parent families – diverse family structures that continuously evolve.
- Among Canada’s provinces, people in Quebec stand out with regard to couple/relationship formation, with a greater share living common-law than the rest of Canada (40% vs. 16%, respectively) and fewer married couples (60% vs. 84%, respectively) in 2016.
- In 2016, 1.7 million people in Canada reported having an Aboriginal identity: 58% First Nations, 35% Métis, 3.9% Inuk (Inuit), 1.4% other Aboriginal identity and 1.3% with more than one Aboriginal identity.
- In 2016, 22% of people in Canada reported that they were born outside the country – up from 16% in 1961.
- In 2016, more than 1 in 5 people in Canada (22%) reported belonging to a visible minority group, 3 in 10 of whom were born in Canada.
- 73,000 same-sex couples were counted in the 2016 Census, 12% of whom are raising children.
- In 2016, there were nearly 404,000 multi-generational households in Canada – the fastest-growing household type since 2001 (+38%).
- In 2011, 22% of Inuk (Inuit) grandparents, 14% of First Nations grandparents and 5% of Métis grandparents lived with their grandchildren, compared with 3.9% of among non-Indigenous grandparents.
- In 2014, 1 in 5 Canadians aged 25 to 64 reported living with at least one disability. Disability rates were higher for women (23%) than men (18%).
- More than one-quarter (27%) of Canadians surveyed in 2014 said religion is “very important” in their lives.
- One-quarter of Canadians reported “no religious affiliation” in the 2011 Census (most recent data available), up from 17% in 2001.
Download A Snapshot of Family Diversity in Canada (February 2018).
Infographic: Canada’s Families on the Farm
Family farms have played a significant role in Canada’s history, both in terms of the contributions that agriculture has provided in the development of local and provincial economies, and with regard to the role farming has played in shaping community and familial identities. Farming has a strong impact on the lives of families involved in the practice, as it is a unique experience that ties together notions of home, work, culture and kinship.
The evolution of farm families in Canada reflects some of the broader trends that are shaping the “family landscape” across the country, such as population aging, smaller families, a growing share of women in the labour force, the increased use of technology at work and a diversification of family income sources.
To explore Canada’s farm families, the Vanier Institute of the Family has published an infographic that features data from the 2016 Census of Agriculture.
Highlights include:
- Canada was home to more than 193,000 farms in 2016, down 5.9% from 2011.
- Canada was home to nearly 102,000 farm families in 2013, and the number of farm families decreased every year over the prior decade.
- The average age of farm operators increased from 47.5 years in 1991 to 55 years in 2016.
- The number of farm families with two family members rose from 43% in 2003 to 51% in 2013, while the share with five or more fell from 19% to 14%.
- 8.4% of all farms across Canada in 2016 reported having a written succession plan, and a family member was identified as the successor for 96% of these farms.
- In 2015, 57% of operators aged 60 and over were on farms that reported the use of technology, compared with 81% for those under the age of 40.
Download the Canada’s Families on the Farm infographic from the Vanier Institute of the Family.
Learn more in “Families on the Farm: A Portrait of Generations and Migrant Workers in Canada,” a chapter prepared by the Vanier Institute for Deep Roots, published by the United Nations as part the International Year of Family Farming.
Published on January 16, 2018
Infographic: Family Diversity in Canada (2016 Census Update)
Download the Family Diversity in Canada (2016 Census Update) infographic
The Vanier Institute of the Family has now been exploring families and family life in Canada for more than 50 years. Throughout this half-century of studying, discussing and engaging with families from coast to coast to coast, one thing has been clear from the outset: families in Canada are as diverse as the people who comprise them.
This has always been the case, whether one examines family structures, family identities, family living arrangements, family lifestyles, family experiences or whether one looks at the individual traits of family members such as their ethnocultural background, immigration status, sexual orientation or their diverse abilities.
These parents, children, grandparents, great-grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, cousins, friends and neighbours all make unique and valuable contributions to our lives, our workplaces and our communities. As former Governor General of Canada, His Excellency The Right Honourable David Johnston, said at the Families in Canada Conference 2015, “Families, no matter their background or their makeup, bring new and special patterns to our diverse Canadian tapestry.”
Using new data from the 2016 Census, the Vanier Institute has published an infographic on family diversity in Canada.
Highlights include:
- 66% of families in Canada include a married couple, 18% are living common-law, and 16% are lone-parent families – diverse family structures that continuously evolve.
- 518,000 stepfamilies live across the country, accounting for 12% of couples with children under age 25.
- 404,000 households in Canada are multi-generational,1 and nearly 33,000 children live in skip-generation households.2
- 1.7M people in Canada reported having an Aboriginal identity (58.4% First Nations, 35.1% Métis, 3.9% Inuit, 1.4% other Aboriginal identity, 1.3% more than one Aboriginal identity).
- 360,000 couples in Canada are mixed unions,3 accounting for 4.6% of all married and common-law couples.
- 73,000 same-sex couples were counted in the 2016 Census, 12% of whom are raising children.
- 54,000 military families live in Canada, including 40,000 Regular Force military families and 14,000 Reserve force military families.
Download the Family Diversity in Canada (2016 Census Update) infographic.
This bilingual resource is a perpetual publication, and will be updated periodically as new data emerges (older versions are available upon request). Sign up for our monthly e-newsletter to find out about updates, as well as other news about publications, projects and initiatives from the Vanier Institute.
Notes
- Containing three or more generations.
- Living with grandparent(s) with no middle (i.e. parent) generation present.
- Statistics Canada defines a mixed union as “a couple in which one spouse or partner belongs to a visible minority group and the other does not, as well as a couple in which the two spouses or partners belong to different visible minority groups.” Link: http://bit.ly/2tZvrSr.
Infographic: Modern Couples in Canada
Just as families have evolved across generations, so too have the couple relationships that are a major part of Canada’s “family landscape.” This perpetual change is both a reflection of and a driving force behind some of the evolving social, economic, cultural and environmental forces that shape family life.
Dating, marriage, cohabitation, common-law relationships – the ways people choose to come together, or decide to move apart, are as diverse as the couples themselves. There are, however, some broad trends being witnessed across the country, with family structures diversifying, people forming couple relationships at later ages and family finances taking on a more egalitarian structure.
Using new data from the 2016 Census, the Vanier Institute of the Family has published an infographic on modern couples in Canada.
Highlights include:
- In 2016, married couples accounted for 79% of all couples in Canada, down from 93% in 1981.
- One-quarter of “never-married” Canadians say they don’t intend to get married.
- In 2016, 21% of all couples in Canada were living common-law, up from 6% in 1981.
- The share of twentysomething women (37%) and men (25%) living in couples has nearly halved since 1981 (falling from 59% and 45%, respectively).
- In 2016, 12.4% of all couple families in Canada with children under 25 were stepfamilies, down slightly from 12.6% in 2011.
- There are 73,000 same-sex couples in Canada, 12% of whom are raising children.
- 1 in 5 surveyed Canadians reported in 2011 that their parents are separated or divorced, up from 10% in 2001.
- The share of people living in mixed unions nearly doubled between 1991 and 2011, from 2.6% to 4.6%.1
- 69% of couples with children were dual-earner couples in 2014, up from 36% in 1976.
Download the Modern Couples in Canada infographic from the Vanier Institute of the Family
Notes
- Statistics Canada defines a mixed union as “a couple in which one spouse or partner belongs to a visible minority group and the other does not, as well as a couple in which the two spouses or partners belong to different visible minority groups.”
The Canadian Family: Redefining Inclusion (video)
On June 22, 2017, Vanier Institute CEO Nora Spinks participated in the 2017 Speaker Series – The Canadian Family: Redefining Inclusion. Hosted by Roots of Empathy, this event brought together leaders and educators to discuss diversity, inclusion and modern families in Canada.
One of Roots of Empathy’s organizational goals is to foster inclusiveness. In this engaging and catalytic panel discussion, Nora Spinks joined Zeena Al Hamdan (Programs Manager, Arab Community Centre of Toronto), Paul Cormier (Assistant Professor, Lakehead University, and member of the Lake Helen First Nations, Red Rock Indian Band), Tesa Fiddler (Indigenous Education Resource Teacher, Thunder Bay Catholic District School Board) and panel moderator Cheryl Jackson (Director of Communications, Roots of Empathy) to explore and discuss what this means for families in Canada.
Watch The Canadian Family: Redefining Inclusion on the Roots of Empathy YouTube Channel.
Published on July 26, 2017
Infographic: Family Diversity in Canada 2016
International Day of Families is approaching on May 15, a special day to recognize the importance of family to communities across the globe. Parents, children, grandparents, great-grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, cousins and the friends and neighbours we care for (and who care for us) all make unique and valuable contributions to our lives, our workplaces and our communities.
As we reflect on Canada’s 9.9 million families, one thing that’s clear is that there’s no such thing as a cookie-cutter family. Families are as diverse and unique as the people who comprise them, and they are all an essential part of Canada’s family landscape.
For this year’s International Day of Families, we’ve created an infographic providing a “snapshot” of modern families in Canada that highlights some of the many ways families are diverse:
- 67% of families in Canada are married-couple families, 17% are living common-law, and 16% are lone-parent families – diverse family structures that continuously evolve
- 464,000 stepfamilies live across the country, accounting for 13% of couples with children
- 363,000 households contain three or more generations, and there are also approximately 53,000 “skip-generation” homes (children and grandparents with no middle generation present)
- 1.4 million people in Canada report having an Aboriginal identity (61% First Nations, 32% Métis, 4.2% Inuit, 1.9% other Aboriginal identity, 0.8% more than one Aboriginal identity)
- 360,000 couples in Canada are mixed unions,* accounting for 4.6% of all married and common-law couples
- 65,000 same-sex couples were counted in the 2011 Census, 9.4% of whom are raising children
- 68,000 people in Canada are in the CAF Regular Forces, half of whom have children under 18
As His Excellency The Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General of Canada, expressed at the Families in Canada Conference 2015, “Families, no matter their background or their makeup, bring new and special patterns to our diverse Canadian tapestry.” Join us as we recognize and celebrate family diversity, from coast to coast to coast.
Download the Family Diversity in Canada 2016 infographic.
* Statistics Canada defines a mixed union as “a couple in which one spouse or partner belongs to a visible minority group and the other does not, as well as a couple in which the two spouses or partners belong to different visible minority groups.”
Modern Motherhood: The Unique Experiences of Women with Physical Disabilities
Lesley A. Tarasoff
There is very little research concerning pregnancy, labour, birth and motherhood among women with physical disabilities and women with disabilities more broadly. While most women face a variety of social and emotional pressures to have children, research has found that women with disabilities have a very different experience, as they are often pressured not to have children. Many of these girls and women experience “training against motherhood” as soon as they are diagnosed as having a disability. Despite these pressures, there are many women with physical disabilities who are also mothers. Although in Canada it is difficult to determine just how many women with physical or mobility-limiting disabilities are mothers, data from the United States suggests that they are becoming mothers at similar rates to women without disabilities.
As part of a long-term project, a diverse group of women with physical or mobility-limiting disabilities in the Greater Toronto Area have been interviewed about their experiences during the perinatal period – pregnancy, labour, birth and early motherhood. Drawing on other research studies and preliminary findings from this project, this article looks at some of the unique experiences of women with physical disabilities during the perinatal period.
While most women face a variety of social and emotional pressures to have children, research has found that women with disabilities are often pressured not to have children.
There are many misconceptions about women with physical disabilities, including the idea that they cannot or should not become mothers. Women with physical disabilities are often on the receiving end of disability and reproductive “microaggressions.” Initially conceptualized with regard to racial and ethnic minority groups, microaggressions refer to “the brief and commonplace, daily verbal, behavioral, and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative … slights and insults on the target person or group.” Disability or ableist microaggressions include things such as exclusion, messages of undesirability, messages of burden, assumptions, pity and astonishment (e.g., the realization that a person with a disability is capable of achievements).
For women with disabilities who are pregnant or who are mothers, these ableist beliefs and patterns of behaviour are often compounded with what some call reproductive microaggressions. These can be direct, such as denying privacy by asking when a woman will have a baby, or indirect, such as expressions of gratitude for having a “healthy child.” Underlying many reproductive microaggressions is reproductive privilege (i.e., the traditional idea or ideal of which women should be mothers [read: white, middle-class, heterosexual, women without physical disabilities]), together with the idea that motherhood is the most exalted form of identity for women.
Jane, one of the research project participants – a married and employed mother of two with a spinal cord injury – shared her thoughts about her perinatal experience. While it was positive overall, largely thanks to her strong advocacy skills and a great team of health care providers, she still experienced a number of negative social interactions commonly experienced by women with physical disabilities in the perinatal period. Sometimes these interactions were overtly discriminatory and negative, such as when a stranger on the sidewalk told her she “shouldn’t be allowed to have children.” Other times, the microaggressions were less explicit. Like many women with physical disabilities, Jane found that many people didn’t see pregnancy as a possibility for her or recognize her as being pregnant as they might have with other women. She often encountered subtle reactions of surprise (astonishment) to her pregnancy and status as a mother while in public spaces such as waiting rooms. Sometimes the microaggressions she described took the form of differential treatment, such as the time she was asked in a grocery store whether she had her daughter “naturally” – noting that it’s unlikely a mother without a disability would have been asked the same question.
Research suggests that women with physical or mobility-limiting disabilities are becoming mothers at similar rates to women without disabilities.
Microaggressions at the intersection of disability and reproduction can also take the form of denying identity or personality by asking a mother without disabilities “Is that your baby?” or of desexualizing women with disabilities through comments such as “I can’t believe you have a baby.” These comments were occasionally directed at Jane, who said that many people she encountered assumed that she had adopted. Microaggressions sometimes take on a patronizing form, such as when people say they feel “inspired” by women with disabilities who decide to have children. Finally, microaggressions also include assumptions of helplessness and infantilizing remarks directed at these mothers, such as asking “Do you need help with your baby?”
Despite the assumption that spinal cord-injured women are able to give birth only via Caesarean section, research reveals that they can have vaginal births. “Everyone still thinks that I had a C-section,” says Jane, acknowledging this misconception.
Indeed, a growing body of research indicates that many women with physical disabilities experience fertility no differently than their counterparts without disabilities and they are capable of becoming pregnant and experiencing vaginal delivery. Though limited, there is some research concerning the pregnancy outcomes of women with physical disabilities. Some of this research suggests that expectant mothers who have physical disabilities may experience common symptoms of pregnancy more severely, and that pregnancy can temporarily or permanently “alter the course” of the disability.
Perinatal outcomes among women with physical disabilities vary depending on the type and severity of their disability. “As much as I want to say that my pregnancy was the same as everyone else’s,” Jane says, “I do admit that there probably were higher risks of complications with mine to a certain degree.” For instance, she noted that her mobility worsened during the course of her pregnancy – a change that she says wasn’t fully recognized by care providers. Indeed, studies reveal that health care providers generally do not know a great deal about the interaction of pregnancy and disability. Jane cited an example of her nurses not knowing a lot about the different catheter options.
Likewise, many of the women with physical disabilities who were interviewed, including Jane, reported feeling frustrated with the lack of perinatal information available to them and often experienced feelings of isolation because it was difficult to find others to share their experiences with. “I found it very frustrating that there is so little research. So any question I had, nobody could give me an answer,” she says. “It was always like, ‘We don’t really know. We’re not really sure.’” In addition to informational barriers, many women with physical disabilities report encountering inaccessible care settings. Jane cited examples such as places with bathrooms or showers she couldn’t access or fit her wheelchair into.
Disabled or not, at one time or another, everybody needs assistance, and it is rare that someone really, truly raises a child single-handedly.
Exploring how women with physical disabilities experience the perinatal period will provoke an interrogation of the self, of what is “normal” and what accessibility is, as well as what independence looks like. Parents with disabilities, like all parents, are creative and adaptable. In many cases, formal resources and supports are not available or accessible, and so some parents with disabilities may rely on unconventional resources and other supports to fulfill their roles effectively. At one time or another, everybody needs assistance whether they have a disability or not, and it is rare that someone really, truly raises a child single-handedly.
Moreover, for some mothers with physical disabilities, becoming a parent takes focus away from their disability and places it on other aspects of their lives, such as the new bond between parent and child as well as the child’s imagination and creativity. As Jane puts it, “Becoming a mom is probably the best thing that I did because it totally lessened … my focus or other people’s focus on my disability. My parents ask way less about my own health; they ask more about the kids.”
In particular, Jane talked about how her physical inability to do certain activities with her young son has led to opportunities to bond and play with him in other ways:
“[My son] knows that I do all the creative stuff with him, so I do all the artwork… he kind of sees us [my husband and me] as having those different [roles] … I love doing imaginative things and I think that’s important for his growing and learning … so for me what’s really boosted my confidence in parenting is that I have that ability or that gift to do that with him and the daycare has commented that he’s such a really imaginative kid…”
A number of other mothers who were interviewed shared similar stories about their relationships with their children and talked about how becoming a mother enhanced their confidence.
Many of the mothers also worried about how their children might be treated in school when other children found out that their mother has a disability: “Kids can be mean… I don’t want people to make fun of him because of me.” One mother with a congenital condition that often limits her mobility, as well as causes hearing and vision problems, arthritis and chronic pain, noted, however, that she uses her disability as a learning opportunity for her young son: “I don’t want him to make fun of anybody. I am trying to tell him that everyone is different.”
The experiences of women with physical disabilities during the perinatal period, including their parenting experiences, provide learning opportunities for all families and their children. This ongoing research project will help to develop resources for women with physical disabilities and health care providers and shed light on some of the positive experiences that they have during the perinatal period. Listening to and documenting the stories and experiences of women like Jane will be integral to this process of providing support.
Lesley A. Tarasoff is a Ph.D. candidate in Public Health at the University of Toronto. She conducts research in the area of women’s sexual and reproductive health, with a focus on women with physical disabilities and sexual minority women. For more information about her research, visit www.latarasoff.com.
Learn more:
Lesley A. Tarasoff, “We Don’t Know. We’ve Never had Anybody Like You Before”: Barriers to Perinatal care for Women with Physical Disabilities,” Disability and Health Journal 10:3 (July 2017). Link: http://bit.ly/2fmk65C.
Lori E. Ross, Lesley A. Tarasoff, Abbie E. Goldberg and Corey E. Flanders, “Pregnant Plurisexual Women’s Sexual and Relationship Histories Across the Life Span: A Qualitative Study,” Journal of Bisexuality (August 11, 2017). Link: http://bit.ly/2wfhZaN.
Lesley A. Tarasoff, “Experiences of Women with Physical Disabilities during the Perinatal Period: A Review of the Literature and Recommendations to Improve Care,” Health Care for Women International 36:1 (July 2013). Link: http://bit.ly/2hqbiQE.
Update: In September 2017, a community report was published based on this research into the experiences of women with physical disabilities. “Becoming Mothers: Experiences of Mothers with Physical Disabilities in Ontario” is now available to download on Lesley’s website.
SOURCES
Judith Rogers, The Disabled Woman’s Guide to Pregnancy and Birth (New York: Demos Medical Publishing, 2006).
Corbett Joan O’Toole, “Sex, Disability and Motherhood: Access to Sexuality for Disabled Mothers,” Disability Studies Quarterly 22:4 (2002).
Lisa I. Iezzoni, Jun Yu, Amy J. Wint, Suzanne C. Smeltzer and Jeffrey L. Ecker, “Prevalence of Current Pregnancy Among US Women with and without Chronic Physical Disabilities,” Medical Care, 51:6 (June 2013).
Alette Coble-Temple, Ayoka Bell and Kayoko Yokoyama, The Experience of Microaggressions on Women with Disabilities: From Research to Practice and Reproductive Microaggressions and Women with Physical Limitations. Presentations at the American Psychological Association Annual Convention (August 2014).
Derald Wing Sue, Jennifer Bucceri, Annie I. Lin, Kevin L. Nadal and Gina C. Torino, “Racial Microaggressions and the Asian American Experience,” Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13:1 (2007).
Ayoka K. Bell, Nothing About Us Without Us: A Qualitative Investigation of the Experiences of Being a Target of Ableist Microaggressions (2013 doctoral dissertation), retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (dissertation/thesis number 3620204).
Heather Kuttai, Maternity Rolls: Pregnancy, Childbirth and Disability (Fernwood Publishing, 2010).
Caroline Signore, Catherine Y. Spong, Danuta Krotoski, Nancy L. Shinowara and Sean Blackwell, “Pregnancy in Women with Physical Disabilities,” Obstetrics & Gynecology, 117:4 (2011).
Suzanne C. Smeltzer and Nancy C. Sharts-Hopko, A Provider’s Guide for the Care of Women with Physical Disabilities and Chronic Health Conditions (2005).
Published on December 3, 2015
Updated on September 25, 2017
The Place of the Family in Times of Social Transition, Part 2
Dr. Elise Boulding was a founding thinker behind the work of the Vanier Institute, a family sociologist and author whose work informed (and continues to inform) our understanding of families and family life. In 1981, she delivered a public lecture that was published by the Vanier Institute entitled The Place of the Family in Times of Transition: Imagining a Familial Future, which explores the role families play in the lives of individuals and society at large. While she delivered these words more than three decades ago, much of the content is timeless and still provides insight into how families serve as a cornerstone of our ever-evolving society.
The following is the second of two excerpts from this lecture. The full lecture can be downloaded by following the link at the bottom of the page.
Every family is a “micro-society”
We can think of each family or each familial grouping as a micro-society choosing a life path. We have discussed, at the Vanier conference over the last two days, lifestyle options. We have talked about the fact that most people really don’t have many choices in their lives. There are so many constraints, so many things one can’t do, so many opportunities that are not available because of age, sex, education, economic background, whatever. Each family, in effect, given the resources and opportunities available to it, makes choices about the kind of micro-society it wants to be. At its best, that is what the family is, a culture-choosing entity. The industrial family doesn’t do this on its own, however. There is no such thing as a familial group in isolation.
Think about an evening at home, when you draw down the blind, shut the door and settle in for a quiet family evening just by yourselves. Look at the activities that are being carried on; you are on the telephone engaged in “community networking”; you are planning a meeting, writing messages or notes about meetings; or you are reading up for some kind of personal project. At least, you are reading newspapers or watching TV to see what’s going on in the world, making shopping lists or deciding when family members need their next medical checkup, or maybe you are thinking about the next PTA meeting at school.
In short, a host of things go on inside the family setting that have to do with the community itself and with the quality of civic life. When you are out in the community, on the other hand, a lot of what you are doing is creating the quality of your family life. If you are at school expressing concern about the music or language program, or the way arithmetic is being taught, you are concerned about the quality of your child’s life. This is part of family life. It’s as a family person that you are concerned, and you are concerned not only for your own child but for other children.
Wherever we are in the community, we are constructing our family life out there. So much of the quality of our family life depends on whether we have a neighbourhood shopping centre, whether there is a mall in the downtown area, where the bus routes go, whether we have public transportation. All of these things impinge on family life. What we do in the community we also do for our family, and what we do for our family we also do for the community. The family is an interface between the public and the private.
Families provide nurturance to individuals and communities
Society requires human beings who are able to engage in nurturant acts for survival. They must be men and women. As long as nurturance is defined as women’s work, remains women’s role, society is to remain rigid and crisis-prone. Nurturance has to be a task that is jointly shared by men and women. The capacity to identify and act on the needs of others, to think about the neighbourhood, begins in early childhood. The training for nurturance, the learning, the skills, the listening, the evaluating of the response of the other comes in the family. The family isn’t the only place we learn it, but it is a very important place. Extending that process into more places in the community, creating environments where other families can have their stresses lessened so that they too can begin to engage in this kind of sharing-caring is absolutely essential if the work of professionals in social design is to have any use.
Whatever is done in terms of planning and resource redistribution at the county, state and national level has to relate to these capacities, however weak or however strong they are, that are developing inside individual families. To a depressing extent we don’t notice the kinds of help that people give each other, and therefore we don’t build on the human capacities that are already present. We put in professionally designed human services that don’t connect with the nurturance that already goes on.
One of the biggest stumbling blocks to an adequate acknowledgement of the role of the family in society is that helping behaviour and nurturance is considered women’s stuff. It’s thought of as looking after babies and seeing that husbands’ slippers and pipes are laid out. We have, in short, some very poor imagery about the work of nurturance. In fact, nurturance is intimately connected with the conditions under which human beings engage in any kind of learning. What nurturance does is allow a person to be open and vulnerable so that new information can be absorbed, new mental arrangements made of facts about the outside world. That is what happens in learning. If we don’t have places where we can be vulnerable and open, we can’t learn anything. The reason we learned so little in school is that we were scared to death of teachers and we were scared to death of tests. The family at its best is the setting for that kind of openness and learning, a social group in which we learn to accept the uses and values of vulnerability.
The family is a training ground for the future
The family is both a training ground and a metaphor for the kind of society we want. We can take the skills and the analytic capacities that are developed in the course of making judgments about what’s needed in a growing family and in a growing neighbourhood, and carry them from sphere to sphere and level to level as we move from the local to the planetary. I do not mean to oversimplify; conflicts arise, needs and wants differ everywhere. However, the mode of caring, the attitude of nurturance, the willingness to be vulnerable is always appropriate to the human condition at all times and places.
The Place of the Family in Times of Social Transition, Part 1
Dr. Elise Boulding was a founding thinker behind the work of the Vanier Institute, a family sociologist and author whose work informed (and continues to inform) our understanding of families and family life. In 1981, she delivered a public lecture that was published by the Vanier Institute entitled The Place of the Family in Times of Transition: Imagining a Familial Future, which explores the role families play in the lives of individuals and society at large. While she delivered these words more than three decades ago, much of the content is timeless and still provides insight into how families serve as a cornerstone of our ever-evolving society.
The following is the first of two excerpts, the second of which will be published on the Vanier Institute blog next week. The full lecture can be downloaded by following the link at the bottom of the page.
Families and society adapt and react to each other
Each era invents the familial forms it requires. The particular family form consisting of mother, father and children, which we tend to think of as “the family” in our age, is one of those forms. There have always been single-parent households, there have always been extended-family households and there have always been households composed of people who were not related to each other but grouped together because economic, political and social conditions made the grouping useful.
The family is the adaptive mechanism in society that helps us get over the rough spaces as we move from one era to another. It provides elasticity in the social order so we can stretch and contract, make shifts in size, grouping and organizational patterns. The family is a setting in which we can create the other, the different, the alternative. It is both the adaptor and the creator of the new. The family is an instrument for imagining futures.
When I talk about the family, I am talking about any type of group that provides a family-type setting. I include in that category single-person households, since many single persons in a sense maintain a familial network of relationships; that too is a type of family. Anything human beings construct or nurture over time is a family. Attention to this – attention to the craftwork of human relationship – is the new emphasis in our time. The family grouping has enormous advantages for doing this crafting of persons, particularly because the family becomes an instrument for analyzing the complexity of the planet.
If you stop and think about growing up in a multi-age family group where you have older people, middle-years people and children, what you have is the most complex type of human experience possible. It comes directly from one’s own most intimate environment. Each person in a family grouping is older each day than they were the day before. People change ages almost daily, particularly when they are children. As we grow older, we start shrinking; when we are younger, we grow up. Either shrinking or growing, whatever it is, we are changing size and shape: we get heavier, we get lighter, we need different clothes, we have different friends, our aspirations change, our understandings change, our processing of information about the environment changes. Each person in a family, whether we are talking about a three- or five-person family or more, is in themselves a host of complex wishes, aspirations and needs.
The fantastic thing within the family setting is that everybody negotiates those changes every blessed day. You cannot react to the others in your family as if they were yesterday’s person without causing trouble. You will get called down immediately if you are treating a sibling or a parent or a child on the basis of what they didn’t know yesterday, instead of on the basis of what they understand today. You cannot treat them on the basis of yesterday’s understandings. They know more about the world today and they resent being treated like children, like someone who doesn’t understand. We watch the transitions from a tricycle to a two-wheeler, from the two-wheeler to the family car. Those are the big transitions. Little transitions happen every day.
In family groupings, without ever stopping to think about it, we are negotiating extraordinary changes in every person around us and changing ourselves, adapting our behaviours to others. At this moment I am making analytic statements about the process. Normally, we don’t talk about it that way.
Families are teachers of complexity
One advantage of the family as a teacher of complexity is that it provides instantaneous feedback. In the larger social system, you can do all kinds of strange things in your workplace, in the schoolroom, in the community. You may never get feedback on the mistakes you have made or the good things you’ve done. In the family, feedback comes quickly. “That was crummy!” Or “Gee, that was neat!” You get it very fast. We only learn to the extent that we get feedback on our behaviour. In this microcosm of the family, we get continuous feedback as to how good our judgments are and where everybody else is at in the family.
It sounds as if I’m talking about some ideal family where everybody understands everybody else, but I’m not. The mistakes, the fights, the conflicts, the struggles over who gets the family car, what allowance I have this year as compared to last year and all the accompanying hostility is nevertheless part of a feedback system that helps us to grow up being able to assess a rapidly shifting complex environment. Most of us don’t realize what it is we are learning in the family, however. We can carry that complexity with us out into the larger world and consciously make judgments about other people’s shifting needs and aspirations. All the time, we are drawing on knowledge we gained in the family, but we aren’t taught to acknowledge our family-based knowledge. I think we should make that acknowledgement and begin to draw on that basic learning about complexity.
The family has an enormous advantage in its size. I am involved in several projects researching how we adapt to catastrophe, such as climate change and war-incurred disasters. Every time you try to design a larger scale system that is going to meet the individual needs of all the people in it, you miss, because the more people you are trying to plan for, the more individual differences you are simply glossing over. If you look at where adaptation is occurring, whether it is flood or famine or drought or recovery from war disaster, the groups that are making the adaptations are the familial types of groupings. They are the ones that can regroup; they can redistribute roles. A family group can reorganize its way of utilizing its environment more rapidly than any other size of group. It is the ultimate adaptive group.
In every country, family skills are crucial for societal survival. The family does more than adapt, however. It is itself an instrument of change. As society struggles with new conceptions of gender roles, it is in the family unit that actual behaviour is reshaped. While it is important to change our textbooks to present more diverse images of men and women, so that not all women have aprons in our school readers, nevertheless, the practice of the sharing of work and the sharing of parenting – the practices that change the person and reshape the person – happen in the family.
Families live in a “200-year present”
A special feature of the family, apart from its size and its value as a social laboratory that makes it an instrument of change, is that its cross-generational structure provides a way of grasping social time and social process. One of the things that is true about us particularly in this era in history is that we have a very truncated sense of social progress. There is a sense that every important happening has taken place in the last 10 years. If it happened before 10 years ago, it’s ancient history. But a decade or two decades is too narrow a slice of time to give us an understanding of the nature of the changes that are taking place in society. The intergenerational nature of relationships in the family enables us to get hold of larger chunks of time.
I offer for your consideration a concept that I find very useful, that of the 200-year present. This is a very real “present” in the family context. To explain the concept: today is March 19; one boundary of the 200-year present is March 19, 1881. That is the day of the birth of the people who are celebrating their 100th birthday today. The other side of that 200-year present is March 19, 2081, which will be the 100th birthday of the babies born today. Now, you may not have any centenarians in your family, and you may not have any babies born in your family today. Nevertheless, within your extended family and among those close to your family, someone will have been born somewhere close to 100 years ago, and some child you know will be alive 100 years from now.
By thinking about that span of time as encompassing the living present reality of people you know and care about, that span of time becomes accessible. It becomes our time in a very profound sense. This 200-year span belongs to us: it’s our life space. It’s the space in which we should be thinking, planning and making judgments, evaluating, hoping and dreaming. This opening up of what we normally think of as our future and our past and making it a part of our present experience, makes changes more comprehensible.
An enormous expansion of personhood becomes possible by drawing on the life experience within the family. Many people don’t experience their family as history-in-the-present in this way. We don’t share across generations in the family to the extent that we could. I am talking about an instrument that is available to us for this kind of sharing, and shortly I will talk about how we can make it work that way. It doesn’t necessarily work that way, but when it does, it becomes an enormous strengthening force in a period of very rapid change.
Timeline: 50 Years of Families in Canada
Today’s society and today’s families would have been difficult to imagine, let alone understand, a half-century ago.
Families and family life have become increasingly diverse and complex, but families have always been the cornerstone of our society, the engine of our economy and at the centre of our hearts.
Learn about how families and family experiences in Canada have changed over the past 50 years with our new timeline!
Strength in Diversity: Positive Impacts of Children with Disabilities
Michelle R. Lodewyks
When it comes to exploring the experiences of families raising children with disabilities, studies tend to focus on the perceived negative impact of the disability on the family. These families are commonly viewed as “victims” who face excessive caregiving demands, emotional distress, physical and/or financial burdens and interpersonal difficulties, while the children are portrayed primarily as sources of stress and anguish. This tragedy dialogue supports an assumption that families with children with disabilities experience “chronic sorrow” and perpetuates the perception of disability as something to be avoided or eradicated. These perceptions have a major influence on today’s assumptions about – and reactions to – disability, including how professionals respond to children with disabilities and how society views and responds to children at birth. Consequently, the general public tends to overlook many positive impacts and meaningful contributions that children with disabilities make within their families, communities and society in general.
In order to explore the positive impact disability can have within families, a qualitative, interview-based study was performed to add narrative depth to the research. All of the parents and children interviewed identified a variety of positive effects the children have had on their families and contributions the children have made to family life. The most unsurprising discovery was the affirmation that a child with a disability can have some of the same positive effects on their families and make some of the same contributions as any other child. Highlighting these similarities is critical, given the tendency for children with disabilities to be distinguished from other children and viewed as less likely to affect their families in positive ways. Yet perhaps even more meaningful was the discovery that children with disabilities can also have unique positive effects and make unique contributions to families and family life.
Raising a child with a disability provides opportunities for personal growth
Parents in the study reported an ability to more readily recognize and appreciate the value, potential and strengths of a person with a disability as a result of their parenting experiences. Many described how their experiences left them with a greater acceptance of diversity, a stronger belief that there is an inherent and intrinsic value in people and a “more balanced appreciation for what people are about.”
One participant said her experience gave her a new perspective on how to help individuals she works with; she learned not to place limits on people or tell them what they can or cannot do, but instead help them strive for self-improvement. Siblings of children with a disability experienced attitudinal changes brought about by this family relationship. For these siblings, increased exposure to disability in their family environment made them more comfortable around other children with a disability, and they discovered a new-found enthusiasm for getting to know people with disabilities in general.
Children with a disability often exceeded expectations and did not necessarily comply with what is typical for their diagnoses, often being nothing close to the worst-case scenarios predicted by some doctors. As one participant stated, “I don’t know what my parents would have thought about people with disabilities before I came around, but I think it’s just… shown them that it really doesn’t mean that much… you can still be productive and still have goals and not really let anything stop you, as hard as that is sometimes.”
All of the parents in the study perceived themselves as having acquired new or enhanced positive character attributes as a result of raising a child with a disability. Attribute changes included family members learning to open their hearts and to be more loving, warm, caring, creative, balanced, gentle, calm, outgoing, responsible, independent and less selfish.
The positive attribute change most commonly reported by parents of a child with a disability was that they became more tolerant and accepting. As family members learned to be more accepting of diversity and of people’s behaviours, they cultivated a greater respect for other families of children with disabilities and experienced more compassion toward people in general.
Several parents commented that their child made them an overall “better person,” “better parent” or made other family members “better people.” Some of these effects carried over into the workplace: one participant perceived himself as a “better person at work” because of the understanding his son has given him about autism. This understanding has enabled him to relate to staff and other people in a different way; he supports his colleagues by helping them understand and interpret the behaviour of a co-worker who also has autism.
Parents experience pride, joy and strengthened relationships
All parents in the study reported positive emotions their children have fostered in them. A sense of pride was the most common. One parent recognized that some of the things that evoke a sense of pride “may not be the same as what other people [her son’s age] are doing,” yet she maintained she had numerous reasons to be proud. Parents expressed pride in, or were impressed by, their children’s knowledge or creativity, their sense of right and wrong, their methods for overcoming fears, their ability to put their minds to something and take a chance, and for being their own advocates. Additionally, all 10 children reported the positive emotions they also felt they evoked in family members – more than half believing they made their family proud.
One mother insisted she derives more excitement from the little things in life than many other people and that she “celebrate[s] things that other people don’t even think about celebrating” because of her daughter. Another explained her pride in her daughter as follows: “Disability-wise, I’m very proud of her because she hasn’t let her disability control her life. She’s got multiple disabilities… And she doesn’t let that slow her down… It would be too easy to say, ‘Oh, I can’t do this’ and give up… She’s always willing to push the limits and do the best that she can.”
Many parents talked about having met people, gained friendships and made new connections thanks to their child. While any child can expand a family’s social network, certain examples were attributed to the family’s particular circumstances. For one couple, connecting themselves to other families through the creation of a support network for parents with similar experiences has been valuable, as they have been able to offer support to other parents who have approached them for advice and guidance.
Despite one parent noting that having a child with a disability may make some families “fall apart,” many parents perceived that their child strengthened their marriage or made the parents and/or family stronger. Two of the parents felt they had become better at communicating and sharing with their spouse thanks to their child. The father in this couple talked about the difficulty he and his wife experienced when their son was first diagnosed and described the role each played in helping the other get through the “tough parts.” Their experience, he explained, has made him and his wife “more free to talk about things and feelings,” thus improving their communication.
A few parents mentioned how their child added a fresh perspective and/or insight to the family. One father commented on the value of his son’s insight and identified this as something he appreciates most about him: “His insight into things is so different than anybody else. He thinks differently than we do… and I love hearing his insight. He adds such a dimension to our house… I just can’t imagine not having that dimension in our home. It’s… such a core of who we are in this house. He’s so amazing.”
Referring to his natural gifts when it comes to writing and composing music, one of the children insisted that having autism has given him the ability to be hyperfocused and successful with music. He concluded, “I think the music is a positive impact. It can impact everyone else, too, if they hear it.”
When asked how she makes a difference in her family, another one of the children replied, “I suppose it would be a little less lively without me. There wouldn’t be as many interesting dinner conversations.” She also referred to “the whole yin and yang thing” and how she counterbalances the mellowness in her family.
Families learn from their unique experiences and seek to share their knowledge
Before concluding the interviews, all participants were asked what they would like other people to understand about them, their family and/or their experience. Parents shared that their experiences are “not all rosy” – that there have been “challenges,” “struggles,” “obstacles” and “tough times.” Yet parents did not necessarily hold the child responsible for any negative aspects of their experience. One parent admitted that her struggles adjusting to her child’s disability had less to do with the child than with other people’s preconceptions and the parents’ own feelings regarding what their experience would be like. She explained, “There was no question, that period of time where you struggle with it – a bit of a denial thing. Well, you almost grieve, but you come to the conclusion that those feelings are more about you, and what you thought, or what other people might be thinking.”
Other parents agreed that any anger, stress, anxiety and/or crises they may have experienced resulted from having to deal with the ignorance of other people and a general lack of societal understanding rather than from the child. One mother requested that people reconsider their use – or misuse – of certain labels, explaining that, while people with intellectual disabilities are often labelled as hindered in some way, “the hindrance is very often on the so-called ‘normal’ people for lack of understanding them.”
These findings coincided with those from an earlier study in which parents suggested that the sorrow they experienced originated largely from having to deal with recurring messages of negativity and hopelessness from other people, such as professionals, the health system, other family members and friends. This suggests a source of stress and negativity outside the child and that a family’s perceptions about their child may be determined, at least in part, by the surrounding cultural beliefs about disability. Therefore, if society holds negative attitudes toward disability and the surrounding cultural perceptions are largely negative, negativity can be transmitted to the family – to parents’ views of, and beliefs about, their children and to their parenting.
The parents in the study also wished to dispel negative assumptions others might associate with their child and place any negativity in context of the bigger picture. Some described their experience “as a gift instead of a burden,” and insisted it is not a source of anything negative to have a child with a disability in the family, emphasizing that they are not sorry for the way their child has changed their lives. While acknowledging the stress, hard work and commitment required to raise a child with a disability, other parents commented on the unfortunate nature of other people not realizing how rewarding the experience can be. One father reframed his experience raising his son in the following way: “You want a catastrophe? You want tragedy? You know what, let me pick up a paper and show you about somebody who died in a car accident. Let me show you about a young mother that was killed. Let me show you about the tsunami. Those are tragedies. This is a curveball. All you’ve got to do is learn how to hit curves and you’ll be fine… And it’s not easy, but you learn to grow with it.”
Among the most common requests from parents were that assumptions not be made based on disability and that people recognize each child’s ability and potential. Parents insisted that their children can give a lot to society and deserve respect and requested that people make an effort to learn from their children. Elaborating, one parent cautioned, “I was just thinking in terms of the impact of… people with Down syndrome on the world… We’ve been trying to basically eradicate this group of people by all the blood testing and stuff. It devalues the lives that they have. And they have something to offer… They’ve got something really special that we need to sit up and take note of because we could learn a lot from them.”
When asked what they wanted to share with others, similarly powerful messages came from the children. One of the children wanted others to “understand that I have disabilities, but I’m not a worse person for it.” Another child offered the following take-away message: “Lots of people have the perception that I’m kind of slow… I want them to know that I really do know a lot about the world and what’s going on, and it hasn’t stopped me – having cerebral palsy, being in a wheelchair – I’m not an unaware person. I have big ambitions and a bright future. I don’t want them to feel sorry for me, because I think I’m going to have a really good and interesting and fun life!”
The positivity of embracing diversity goes beyond the family
Learning from families who view their circumstances in a positive light, making these perceptions more readily available to the general public and coming to view the experience of raising a child with a disability as one that is not necessarily tragic – but rather enriching and rewarding – can have a variety of positive implications. These findings can provide medical professionals (particularly those involved in prenatal screening and diagnosis) with practical information to share with families when a diagnosis is given. These findings might also benefit other parents currently raising a child with a disability by encouraging them to focus more closely on what their child adds to their life.
In presenting these findings, this study is not denying the existence of challenges and negative family experiences. Sharing these findings is also not suggesting that everything will automatically improve for families who struggle raising a child with a disability. Yet the belief is that appreciating the strengths and positives has potential for beneficial change. There is also evidence that focusing on the children’s positive impacts and contributions may serve to control the meaning and level of stress associated with the experience. This could be helpful in the adaptation process. If more families see their experiences in a positive light, perhaps they can assist in altering widespread perceptions of the impact of disability, provide support to new parents and relieve some of the fear and anxiety around the idea of raising a child with a disability. In doing so, the hope is that a more affirmative way of viewing disability could be promoted.
Michelle Lodewyks is an Instructor in the Disability and Community Support Program at Red River College as well as a graduate of the Master’s Program in Disability Studies at the University of Manitoba.
SOURCES
Fotheringham, J. B., Skelton, M., & Hoddinott, B. (1971). The Retarded Child and His Family: The Effects of Home and Institution. Toronto, ON: Institute for Studies in Education.
Gupta, A., & Singhal, N. (2004). Positive Perceptions in Parents of Children with Disabilities. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 15:1. http://bit.ly/ZSm1oU (accessed October 9, 2014).
Kearney, P. M., & Griffin, T. (2001). Between Joy and Sorrow: Being a Parent of a Child with Developmental Disability. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 34:5.
Kharasch Behr, S. (1989). Underlying Dimensions of the Construct of Positive Contributions That Individuals with Developmental Disabilities Make to Their Families: A Factor Analytic Study. University of Kansas (unpublished doctoral dissertation).
Pearlin, L. I., & Schooler, C. (1978). The Structure of Coping. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 19.
Stainton, T., & Besser, H. (1998). The Positive Impact of Children with an Intellectual Disability on the Family. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 23:1. http://bit.ly/1s01wQt (accessed October 9, 2014).
Summers, J. A. (1988). Family Adjustment: Issues in Research on Families with Developmentally Disabled Children. In V. B. Van Hasselt, P. S. Strain and M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of Developmental and Physical Disabilities. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon.
Swain, J., & French, S. (2000). Towards an Affirmation Model of Disability. Disability & Society, 15:4. http://bit.ly/1ycgl7r (accessed October 9, 2014).
Whitney, D., & Trosten-Bloom, A. (2003). The Power of Appreciative Inquiry: A Practical Guide to Positive Change. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Woolfson, L. (2003). Disabled Children, Parents and Society – A Need for Cognitive Reframing. Proceedings of the British Psychological Society, 11:1. http://bit.ly/1uGHSuW (accessed October 9, 2014).