Answer the 3 questions in the list. each come within 200 words. So two pages in total.
It is very important. Last term the same questions wrote by your writer are failed. Make sure there is no grammar and spelling error.
Question 1 (200 words)
Chapter 1 describes the lack of federal oversight in Canada that can be seen in no national standards for education, child protection, child care, health care, or alternative (foster) care. These national standards apply to both workers (their level of education, wages, etc) and children (who gets which services, etc). This lack of national standards is a structural determinant. Reflect on how this structural determinant has impacted you (if you grew up in Canada) or could have impacted you if you had been a child growing up in Canada (I am grew up in China). Be specific. Do not paraphrase the text. Instead, give specific examples from your own childhood (or a fictional childhood if you grew up elsewhere) on how this structural determinant has impacted you. (Your answer should be between 200 and 250 words, logical, complete, and correct. Spelling, punctuation, and grammar will be worth one mark with 0.5 marks deducted for each error.)
Question 2 (200 words) (Note: make sure your answer focus on the commodification)
Read the following article on Home Children. After you have read this article reflect upon the similarities with the treatment of First Nations children. Your reflection on this commodification of children should include references to both groups of children (Home Children and First Nations children). Your answer should be logical, complete, and correct. Spelling, punctuation, and grammar will be worth one mark with 0.5 marks deducted for each error:
“From the late 1860s right up to 1948, 118,000 children of all ages were emigrated right across Canada to be used as indentured farm workers and domestics. Believed by Canadians to be orphans, only two percent truly were. These children were sent to Canada by over 50 organizations including the well-known and still working charities: Barnardo’s, The Salvation Army and Quarrier’s, to name a few. CEO and founder of the British Home Child Advocacy and Research Association (BHCARA) Lori Oschefski says, “Barnardo’s sent over thirty thousand children here and was by far the largest organization sending children to Canada. Many BHC became known as ‘Barnardo Home Boys’ despite the fact many came from other organizations.”
For the most part, these children were not picked up from the streets but came from intact families, who, through sickness or even death of one of their parents, had fallen on hard times. Because there was no social system in place to help them get through these difficult circumstances, the family had no other way than to surrender their offspring to the organizations. Sometimes this was meant to be a temporary solution until the family got back on their feet and there are cases on record where some parents went back to pick their children up, only to find that they had already been sent away. Sometimes the parents received an ‘after sailing’ notification, informing that their children had been emigrated a week before.
Once in Canada, the children were sent to receiving homes right across the country until farmers picked them up or they were sent on to their destinations with a cardboard sign around their necks. There were at least seven applicants for every child shipped to this country. “These children are not to be confused with ‘Guest Children’ who were temporarily sent from evacuation zones in the U.K. to Canada during the Second World War to be kept safe from areas under attack. The British Home Children were sent away to work, some never to see their families again.
The child migration scheme was born during the Industrial Revolution. Traditional extended families were broken up and many moved to urban areas to find work and a better life. And so, if anything happened to one of the parents, there was no immediate family nearby to take them in. Abandoned British children lived and died in the streets and workhouses were overcrowded. Emigration was seen as a brilliant solution. The children would be sent to Canadian farms under contract. The terms would require that children be housed, fed, clothed, and sent to school. A small fee would be paid for fostering younger children, older children would help with chores, and more extended labour would be required from adolescents. At 18, the terms of indenture were to be discharged. The clean, fresh air of a Canadian farm was seen as a definite better alternative to living in the slums of a large city.
Canada was marketed to the parents and the children as a haven within the storms of their lives where money grew on trees and the adventure of travelling to a land where cowboys and lumberjacks were, sounded appealing. The parents were relieved that a way had been found where their children would be safe and healthy. However, the harsh truth was that the monitoring of children’s placements was often neglected, and many children found themselves essentially abandoned to new lives which were worse than the old. Siblings were separated. Girls assisted farm wives not only with housework and children but on the fields, as well. Boys became farm workers who were grossly overworked. Children could be ‘returned’ and reassigned. Many were moved from one farm to another. Some ran away or simply disappeared; some died from injuries resulting from neglect and abuse, and some committed suicide.
In the very least, the belief in eugenics that was running rampant throughout the U.K. and North America caused children to be considered inferior stock to their Canadian counterparts. They were stigmatized as such, merely because they were poor and needed help. In communities where these children were meant to be fostered and nurtured, they were often taunted and made to feel shame for being a Home Boy or Home Girl. This shame caused many Home Children to remain silent about their backgrounds their entire lives. Some influential political voices were raised against bringing the children to Canada in this way, but it was more about the dangerous and filthy ‘Street Arabs infecting’ Canadian society than it was about the welfare of the children.
It wasn’t until 1924 that children under the age of 14 were discouraged from being sent. Even so, some young ones slipped through the cracks. In any case, the majority of children continued to be sent right up until the advent of the Second World War, after which heightened social consciousness condemned the sending of any more children to Canada in this way. Over ten percent of the current Canadian population are descendants of the Home Children, although many are still unaware of their heritage. This is one of the many reasons why the Home Children and their determination and perseverance deserve to have their huge contribution to the founding of our nation recognized and their stories heard. To date, Canada has offered no apology. Canada claims there is not enough interest in the British Home Children and it wasn’t even on the political radar.”
Question 3 (200words)
Do you think that healthy attachment is the basis for forming healthy adult relationships? Reflecting on your own attachment figures when you were a young child, cite specific personal examples that support your position. (Your answer should be between 200 and 250 words, logical, complete, and correct. Spelling, punctuation, and grammar will be worth one mark with 0.5 marks deducted for each error.)
