Evidence of meeting #92 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 44th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was family.
A video is available from Parliament.
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
6:20 p.m.
Conservative
6:20 p.m.
Professor, Western University, As an Individual
I think it's definitely worth considering expanding the leave time for people who adopt more than one child at one time. For sibling groups, there are jurisdictions where the adoption of sibling groups makes you eligible for more leave than adopting a single child.
I also think it's important to ensure that there's some funding for the supports that the parents need post-adoption. This would probably help encourage more people to adopt and also to adopt children who have special challenges, maybe physical or cognitive challenges. That support doesn't necessarily have to come in the form of leave from work, but it's also that there's support for helping that child along the way.
As I said, there can be added challenges, beyond attachment, to adoption, and some of them can be expensive. Providing some support in that way is important, and also ensuring that those supports are really available to the people who adopt because some of them really struggle to find them.
6:20 p.m.
Liberal
Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
Thanks to the witnesses who are in attendance here today.
I'm going to follow up on some of the questions that were just asked.
When I look back at the history of benefits that have been provided to parents, I see that, way back in the year 1971 when I was born, my mother would have received 15 weeks of maternity benefits in that year. As we look through the 1990s and into the the 2000s, we witness the introduction of parental benefits provided to both parents and the extension of the weeks that were provided, and here we are today.
It's been a long journey, if you look back at the history, in terms of the benefits that have been provided. If I refer to Madame Chabot's reference to unions, all of these gains have been made by people pushing government—unions, specifically, through collective bargaining processes—and fighting for additional benefits. It's been a real collective effort, and both Ms. Eisner and Professor McLeod are a big part of that today, as has been recognized by other committee members. It's been quite a journey and a long journey.
Some of the questions I would have along those lines are in terms of what the gap is right now between where Canada is.... Professor McLeod talked about Canada being an outlier. What's the gap right now in terms of the gold standard of benefits that have been provided—I think you just referenced a couple in your last answer—and where we're at now? It almost seems like a given, as was referenced, that we're going to pass this and that it's just a matter of in what shape or form.
How do we change the narrative and the legislation to ensure that we're not an outlier on a go-forward basis?
6:25 p.m.
Professor, Western University, As an Individual
Definitely, we can ensure equality. In fact, if this bill were to pass or if these benefits were to become part of a system in Canada, in some cases we would actually have more leave than some of the nations that I mentioned. Some don't allow a full year, but the ones I mentioned all allow for equality. I mentioned ones where more leave is provided when a sibling group is adopted. I think that's definitely worth thinking about. In the case of biological reproduction where people have more than one child at a time—triplets—it's worth considering more leave in those circumstances too.
With regard to allowing for flexibility, some of them will talk about having paid time off work for appointments related to adoption before placement. This could happen quite a bit earlier. I mean, there are so many appointments that we have to go to—doing the PRIDE training and all of that. Usually you can fit that into your work schedule, but not everybody can. There's a lot of preparation for an adoption. You can ensure that people's work is protected. Some jurisdictions do that. They allow for that sort of flexibility, even before a match has been made. You don't even know who you're adopting yet, but you really want to make this happen and you need the time to do that. There is a lot of time involved in just qualifying for adoption. That's true in most countries, so I think—
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
I'm sorry, Professor McLeod.
I noticed that in the States—and you alluded to their lack of support on this issue—the Americans who who took part in an adoption process and were polled talked about the benefits from their employer, and 68% of them talked about those benefits being a big thing that encouraged them. They were part of the decision-making process to adopt.
I wonder if the passage of this benefit and the equity that you and Ms. Eisner are seeking, will, in some shape or form, bump up our adoption rates here in Canada.
6:25 p.m.
Professor, Western University, As an Individual
There is some evidence of that from our survey. We did survey some awaiting parents. They hadn't necessarily adopted yet. Some said they would have been more likely to adopt a sibling group or adopt a child with special needs if they knew they had more leave.
Particularly in those cases where kids are hard to place—it can be very hard to place a sibling group, and it can be very hard to place a child with physical or cognitive disabilities—there is some indication from our survey that some people would have considered those adoptions more seriously if they knew they had a full year of leave.
Generally, I think sending the signal that this is an equally valuable way of forming a family could help to encourage more people to adopt.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
Mr. Chair, I don't know how much time I have left, but I have one quick question.
6:25 p.m.
Liberal
Chad Collins Liberal Hamilton East—Stoney Creek, ON
It's in relation to the benefits that accrue to the parent.
We focused a lot of our questions on the benefits that accrue to the child or children being adopted. We heard from a previous witness in terms of some of the challenges that parents experience through this process.
I wonder what the additional weeks mean in terms of their dealing with.... One of the witnesses at our last meeting talked about the depression that some adoptive parents go through as part of this process, which I never would have thought of.
Can you quickly elaborate on the benefits that accrue to the parent with the additional weeks that are being discussed today?
6:25 p.m.
Professor, Western University, As an Individual
In the report, we use the language of parents bonding with their children and children attaching to their parents—that's how psychologists refer to it—and how bonding to a child certainly can be easier if they're attaching to you.
If they express no attachment or unhealthy attachment, it can be very difficult. It poses added challenges. All of us who are parents know that parenting can be challenging, but when you have a child who's not attached to you, it's very difficult.
I had an experience. I adopted, and a friend of mine adopted at the same time. Her child had a very unhealthy attachment style and would come to me as often as to my friend whenever that child needed something. He was treating me as much as his parent as her. I can't imagine the difficulty she found in that kind of behaviour. It was sad for everyone, for him and for her. He definitely got over that. He's doing really well now, but that's challenging.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Professor McLeod and Mr. Collins.
Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.
6:30 p.m.
Bloc
Louise Chabot Bloc Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Some of my colleagues have asked about ways to improve the situation. In my opinion, correcting inequity in the employment insurance system would be a step in the right direction, because we're talking about 15 weeks of attachment benefits, the employment relationship and bonding with the child. For a parent, those things really matter.
I just want to remind you that the employment insurance system is no silver bullet, and that it's important we move forward. These parental benefits won't make parents any richer, because we're talking about an income replacement rate of up to 55% of the claimant's assessment. Unfortunately, if things go sideways along the way, if they lose their job, for example, the situation could deteriorate in terms of benefits.
So we will fix what needs to be fixed, but it should be part of a comprehensive reform of the employment insurance system, which we're expecting and which would provide additional support in these situations.
If I understand correctly, an amendment should at least be made so that the parent can choose to take the 15‑week parental leave and has the flexibility to decide how many weeks of leave they want to take before and after the child's arrival. I understand that's a desirable amendment we could make as parliamentarians.
Ms. McLeod, did I understand your intention when you talked about flexibility?
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
6:30 p.m.
Professor, Western University, As an Individual
I would just add a point made by Cathy Murphy earlier. I definitely agree that kin and customary caregivers should be included in the eligibility for attachment benefits.
6:30 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Bobby Morrissey
Thank you, Ms. McLeod.
We'll now conclude with Mr. Angus for two and a half minutes.
6:30 p.m.
NDP
Charlie Angus NDP Timmins—James Bay, ON
Thank you, Chair.
I have a fair amount of experience on the indigenous front. It is often a dark story, but there are some extraordinary young people we've seen. I live in a little working-class town, so we get to know most of the kids.
One of my concerns, which I've always felt, is that, for children who were in the foster care system, it was almost as if there was a mark that wasn't stated. When they needed extra help at school, it was “well...you know.” If they got in trouble with the police, it was “well...you know.” They didn't have the love that they needed.
I've known some of these young people and seen them grow up. I was in a youth group with some of them. Some of them are extraordinary. However, there's that need to have someone in your corner.
Ms. Eisner, if you don't mind.... I don't want to pry, but you speak with a lot of young people.
For the older children in the system, how important is it to know that, when something happens at school or when something happens, someone is there, that an adult is going to be there to have their backs, tell them they are loved and say, “You know what? Don't worry about it. It's just another day at school. You're going to be amazing.”
It's that extra bit of support. I'm not saying it's not there with foster parents, but that's my general impression from the kids I knew growing up.
6:35 p.m.
Student, As an Individual
From my personal experience and the stories I've heard from others, I would agree with you 150%. It is so obvious that, when there is an issue, the kid in care is always the first one to get blamed or it's an excuse. It shouldn't be either of those things.
It's very important to have someone in your corner. I've seen children who are now older than me age out of the foster system back home in New Brunswick, and it's heartbreaking to see that they don't have anyone. You see that come out in anger. They are angry at the world. They're angry at the government. They have nobody to support them. The only people they have are their selected family, who could be friends.
There are lots of different cases, of course, but when you don't have that figure you can look up to and rely on, it makes life that much more difficult.
I wanted to add on....
