The Legault government must abandon its “colonialist and paternalistic” approach and acknowledge the existence of systemic racism if it truly wants to introduce cultural security into the health network, the College of Physicians of Quebec (CMQ) argued on Tuesday.
The President of the CMQ, Dr. Mauril Gaudreault, had a tense exchange with First Nations and Inuit Relations Minister Ian Lafrenière at the start of consultations on Bill 32. In the preamble he pointed out that “indigenous peoples must be distinguished.” from other users [du réseau de la santé] because they form nations with their own history and culture.”
“For me, diagnosis involves recognizing a problem. I know this makes you uncomfortable. The situation makes us uncomfortable. You, you are with the word, put Dr. Gaudreault presented to the minister. I think we need to acknowledge the systemic racism in the healthcare system. To correct a situation, you must first recognize it. »
The minister said he found the CMQ’s position “strong”.[e] in the coffee.” “You consulted four people, I visited the 55 communities [autochtones] ” he said. The importance of acknowledging systemic racism to establishing a cultural safety approach divides the Indigenous population and the health community.
“Intersectional”, “colonial”
Before Mr. Lafrenière, CMQ representatives used terms that cause discomfort within the Legault government, such as “intersectionality.” “The word ‘Indigenous’ is spelled with a lower case ‘a’ in your bill, as if Aboriginal people were not a separate nation,” even Dr. Gaudreault. The minister undertook to correct the spelling of the word.
The CMQ considers that Minister Lafrenière’s bill is “characterized by a colonialist and paternalistic approach”, in particular because it was not written for indigenous peoples and is “presumptuous”.[e] What would be appropriate and reassuring for these populations?
Like the Order of Nurses of Quebec (OIIQ), the organization is concerned about the terms used in the text of the law. The bill therefore proposes to “adapt, where possible, the delivery of health and social services” through safe practices, such as hiring local staff, training staff or accessing support resources.
“We consider that this wording minimizes the content and scope of the bill, while the cultural security approach is intended to be essential,” argued the OIIQ in particular, in a position similar to that of the CMQ.
“I understand that it is a weak term,” admitted Minister Lafrenière.
The AFNQL is missing
For his part, the head of the Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador (APNQL), Ghislain Picard, has decided not to participate in the consultations on Bill 32. He believes the text of the law “disregards the rights of First Nations nations.” particularly because it “assumes the power to legislate on a subject within the jurisdiction of our First Nations governments.”
According to Chief Picard, the bill “provides a somewhat too brief definition of the concept of cultural security, which does not only refer to the service provided, but is primarily concerned with the experience of the individual.” It is clearly a bill “with the flavor of colonialism that no longer has any place,” the leader wrote in an open letter to the media.