Child Marriage Hypocrisy in Canada

"There's been absolutely no reflection on the fact that it [child marriage] remains legal in Canada."
"[Child marriage in Canada] is legal and ongoing. [Research results probably] underestimate the true extent of the practice."
"Child marriage is associated with poor health and economic outcomes, particularly for girls."
Alissa Koski, assistant professor, Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University

"Canada has committed to eliminate child, early and forced marriage by 2030 in line with target 5.3 of the Sustainable Development Goals."
"Canada reported on progress made against target 5.3 including some of the foreign aid the government has given to countries to end child marriage as well as domestic figures on child marriage, during its 2018 Voluntary National Review at the High Level Political Forum, the mechanism through which countries report their progress on the Sustainable Development Goals."
Action Canada for Sexual and Health Rights

Canada's explicitly "feminist" government under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau considers itself a leader and vital funder of efforts to end child marriage under the imprimatur of the United Nations where the practise is considered a measure of a country's social development. Canada is proud of the fact that it is involved in combating the incidence of child marriage, forced marriages, the entire culture of girls being viewed as ready for marriage at age 12 and upward. The very practise of both forced and child marriage is an assault against the human rights of any child, male or female.

The welfare of girls and women in developing countries and Canada's involvement in establishing a United Nations fund to elevate the quality of life for both girls and women in impoverished conditions was in fact initiated by the previous Conservative government led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The current Liberal government has expanded that initiative to protecting girls from being forced into early marriage, by custom and culture. Where marriage confers no benefits to the girls, but hastens them into adulthood, robbing them of their childhood.

Children who are married often must cook with fire and heavy pots of boiling water over unventilated cookstoves. (iStock)

So, is Canada an exemplar of commitment to upholding the rights of girls not to be forced into marriage before adulthood? Not quite; even as the Liberal government congratulates itself for its 'progressive' credentials in caring for the human rights of girls in developing countries while portraying itself as their champion, in Canada itself, child marriages continue to occur and seemingly no one in the federal government feels obliged to take much notice of it.

The simple fact of the matter is, while the Canadian government is prepared to intervene in the marriage fortunes of under-privileged girls in developing countries, where immigrants to Canada have brought their child-marriage culture with them to Canada, authorities are loathe to interfere in fear that they will be accused of infringing on peoples' religious freedom. Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in Canada people are guaranteed the right to practise and freedom of religion.

So the reality is that Canada, while deploring child marriages abroad in countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and African countries, legally permits the very same practise in Canada. Various provinces issue marriage licences -- some 3,382 of them, allowing children to be legally married in Canada, over the past 18 years.

Ontario permitted 1,353 child marriages from 2000 forward, Alberta 791, Quebec 590 and British Columbia 429. These reflect immigrants' cultural practises imported with them into Canada. And government authorities' unwillingness to intervene.

Children who are married off do hard labour like agricultural work, cooking, lifting heavy pots and other household chores from dawn to dusk, notes an advocacy group. (iStock)

Compared to boys who are also forced into early marriages, girls marry at younger ages, and often to substantially older males. Five girls per 10,000 population represents the rate in Alberta, contrasting with 1 boy forced into early marriage out of 10,000 population figures, according to measured data dating from the year 2016; three children total per 10,000. Data derived from vital statistics offices while indicating early marriages occur in Canada, offer limited additional information.

Census data might be thought of as clarifying the issue with a more distinct idea of demographics, but that data will include marriages that took place in other countries prior to emigration to Canada. The rate of child marriage in the United States stands at about 6.2 children per 1,000, more elevated for girls than for boys, at 6.8 versus 5.7. The practise is lower among white populations, higher among Indigenous and Chinese.

In Maine, Rhode Island and Wyoming the rate is less than four children per 1,000, graduating upward to as much as ten per 1,000 population in West Virginia, Hawaii and North Dakota, figures provided through Dr Koski's previous American studies of child marriage. Sub-Saharan Africa and India provided figures on child marriage for her doctoral research, feeding into the popular image of child marriage as "something that happens elsewhere".

The minimum age for marriage in Canada set out by Canada's federal Civil Marriage Act is 16, whereas licensing, administered by provinces requires parental consent for those younger than 18 years of age, to acquire a marriage license. According to the standards of the United Nations to which Canada is a participant, child marriage is regarded as a marriage of a child; someone under the age of 18.

Research that has taken place in the United States demonstrates higher mental illness and substance abuse in women who were girl brides.

Enlightened or Merely Hopeful?

"American security is undermined by frail and failing nations where hope is nonexistent, and where conditions foster radicalism, produce refugees, spark insurgency, and provide safe havens for terrorists, criminal gangs, and human traffickers."
"[Strategic development assistance] is not charity -- it is an essential, modern tool of U.S. national security."
Assertion message of 15 retired U.S. admirals and generals 

Syrian refugees encamped at the Turkish border. Many of the world's refugees are not in tents but squatting in urban areas. Photograph: Paris Match/Getty

This was, in essence, the message delivered by top military personnel, now retired, to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee this past June, taking stock of the current administration's loss of interest in following through on traditional American views dating from the end of World War Two that economic development assistance helps to prevent conflict in disadvantaged nations. Which led to a program of economic incentives and practical assistance by the U.S. to developing countries as a matter of internal policy reflecting on American national security.

"The factors that explain which countries have been at risk for civil war are not their ethnic or religious characteristics but rather the conditions that favour insurgency."
"These include poverty -- which marks financially and bureaucratically weak states and also favours rebel recruitment -- political instability, rough terrain, and large populations."
Professors David D. Laitin and James D. Fearon, political scientists, Stanford University

These two expert academics in political science reached the conclusion through an analysis of global conflict that less than $1,000 in per capita income links with 41 percent greater odds that within any given year civil war will break out. Irrespective, they feel of political failures following popular uprisings in Egypt, Libya and Syria resulting from the Arab Spring fever that surged through these populations, the violence that followed might have been minimized if people had been aided in their ability to cope with rising food prices.

And it is true that protests were partially spurred in Egypt by the rising unaffordability of cooking and heating oils and basic foods, but in all three of those Arab nations cited, the rise of fundamentalist Islam had already long since begun, and the region's usual dysfunction arising from tribal, clan and sectarian antipathy, alongside tyrannies and dictatorships would guarantee that public restlessness and challenges to the current political order would ensue.

It has long been a truism that poverty breeds violence, and that people who have been disenfranchised, the voiceless, the vulnerable, the politically bullied and challenged are those who create the movements that lead to violence countering that which they are treated to. Yet facts and reality appear to prove otherwise; it is the well-educated and those from upper-class, economically stable backgrounds who form the base of the violent antagonists.

Creating a docile public by exporting humanitarian funds and charitable aid of all kinds simply removes the onus of responsibility from the tyrants who make the lives of their subjects miserable; transferring aid funding to those governments ensures that the funding is spent on their military and on lining the pockets of the elite. There is a middle way of convincing those nations receiving American largess that it will be halted until and unless a considerable amount of it trickles down to where it is needed.

There are some continents and regions of the world where, as in Africa and the Middle East, endless streams of funding finds its way from the international community to those it deems whose interests they must support, if only to ensure that sharing wealth will not only help to enhance the lives of those who struggle to survive beyond mere existence, but that it will keep them there. The current situations unfolding in the Middle East and Africa prove otherwise.

Europe has been invaded as a result of innumerable refugees fleeing carnage imposed on them by a vengeful, murdering dictator whose response to a protest from a large segment of his sectarian population for equality rights, has been to destroy not only their will to protest, but their homes and their lives. The implosion of Iraq and Syria has been along sectarian lines. The growth of terrorist militias has morphed from the stimulation of the Muslim Brotherhood established 80 years earlier, by Saudi Arabia, by Iran.

Those who consider themselves 'progressive' liberals in their politics see sacrifice on their part as a requirement to aid those living in dire conditions of impoverishment and brutality, and they rise in indignation against a new administration that has decided to increase the budget of its military by cutting billions from the diplomatic and foreign aid budget to pay for that increase. And non-state charities feed on that guilt, prodding those who support their humanitarian business model to lobby government on their behalf.