Note: Transcripts may contain errors. If you wish to re-use all, or part of, a transcript, please contact CBC for permission. Please check the corresponding audio before quoting in print. Copyright © CBC 2021

The Current Transcript for December 13, 2021

Host: Matt Galloway

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

FATEMEH ANVARI: She told me that she is very uncomfortable having this, this conversation and that it goes against everything that she stands for and believes in, but that it is regarding Bill 21.

MATT GALLOWAY: Fatemeh Anvari was a grade three teacher in Quebec. She wears a hijab, and because of that, she was removed from the classroom last week in light of Quebec's Bill 21. In 30 minutes, how parents of kids in Ms. Anvari's Class rallied to support their teacher, and why MPs whose party leaders held their tongues about the law during the recent federal election are now speaking up. Also this morning, how a Nigerian graphic designers' image of a black foetus in utero is challenging what we expect to see in medicine. And later:

STEVEN HICKS: The foster system destroyed all of our culture. So when we come here, we're confused. They are like here, here's jigging, here's hash making, here's elders, here's all this, but it's all new to us. It's also an opportunity that somehow we have to take.

MG: We visit a unique housing complex in Kamloops, British Columbia, that's pairing indigenous youth who've aged out of the foster care system with elders from the community, and both are learning from each other. We start, though, with a fight for social services for people with disabilities in Nova Scotia. Good morning. I'm Matt Galloway and this is The Current.

[Music: Theme]

Advocate feels N.S appeal in disabled rights case shows 'they don't view us as people'

Guests: Vicky Levack and Claire McNeil

[SOUNDCLIP: Vicky Levack talking to a friend]

MG: That's Vicky Levack in Halifax. This morning, we're visiting Vicky in her room at the nursing home, where she has lived for a decade.

VICKY LEVACK: Let's be honest, it's a nursing home. It's a hospital-ish setting. There are way too many rules that don't apply to me because they're for people with dementia. None of these rules for "my protection" apply to me. I've never felt at home here.

MG: Vicky has cerebral palsy and uses a motorised wheelchair. In October, she celebrated a court decision in her province, which found that placing people with physical and mental disabilities in institutions like nursing homes and psychiatric hospitals is discriminatory.

VICKY LEVACK: Most of the food here is, I'm going to be quite frank, it's awful. Most of it caters to people with no teeth, and obviously I have teeth. You can't tell, but trust me I have all of my teeth. I've eaten so many mashed potatoes over the last few years that I cannot even look at mashed potatoes.

MG: Vicky is with the Disability Rights Coalition of Nova Scotia, one of the complainants in the discrimination case. After that victory in October, Vicky and many others were surprised when earlier this month, the provincial government announced that it planned to appeal part of the court's findings.

[SOUNDCLIP: Vicky and others talking about vaccinations]

MG: We have our producer in Halifax with Vicky in her room this morning. Vicky, good morning.

VICKY LEVACK: Good morning.

MG: We'll talk about this court case in just a moment, but tell me... You're 31 years old, how did you end up living in a nursing home?

VICKY LEVACK: I applied for community services and I was told my needs were "too complex" to be serviced by them, and that my only option was to live with my parents until they died and then move into a nursing home or move into a nursing home now. So I had to move there and I had no choice.

MG: What was that like to move in there, as you say, as a young adult?

VICKY LEVACK: I was sold a bill of goods here that was untrue. I was told that there were a lot of people just like me, who need a little help. And they described it to me as a dorm room. Trust me, it is not a dorm room! I feel very, very duped and very, very stupid that I believe them. But I believe when people say things, they are telling the truth. And that was my mistake.

MG: Tell me about the room that you're in. I mean, describe the setting that you're in.

VICKY LEVACK: I'm lucky because I was able to get a private room, but it was only after I was assaulted by a resident, sexually or at least he attempted it. So now I have a private room, but I had to go through something terrible to get that. And at first, they were not going to give me my room because they said, oh, that's only for people with behavioural issues. And so my father and I went on CBC Radio and I told my story, that I had been assaulted and then that story came out and they were like, oh, you can move there next week.

MG: You said that it's never felt like home. Can you tell me more about that? Why doesn't it feel like home to you?

VICKY LEVACK: There are a lot of rules. If you live in your own home, you make the rules and you are not subject to the will of others. I have been called horrible names for being assertive. I've been called a bully that one I can repeat, I was called a bully simply for standing up for my rights and the rights of others.

MG: What are some of the rules that are there that you find difficult to kind of wrap your head around?

VICKY LEVACK: Well, I'm only allowed to have people in my room till 8:30 at night and then they are forced to leave. The doors are locked at 8:30. So when I come home after going out, I have to wait for a nurse to open the door for me. We have meal times that if I want a hot meal that is... I guess they consider it healthy, I don't think so, I have to eat at 4:30. If I don't come down for dinner because I'm working or whatever or I'm out and about. I don't get a hot meal and I am sort of left on my own devices for food. Many of the activities that are for recreation are for people with memory loss and other cognitive issues. Those don't apply to me either. I did play some of the games with them, like Jeopardy because I said I like Jeopardy. But the residents got mad because I knew all the answers and they started hating me because they called me a know it all. I don't participate in those anymore.

MG: You're 31 years old. What is it like... You're in the prime of your life. What is it like for you to live in this space?

VICKY LEVACK: I hate it, I hate it, I hate it, I hate it. It is. I would not. I don't care how old you are. I would not wish this on my worst enemy.

MG: You're part of the Disability Rights Coalition, and when you take a look at living situations that people with disabilities are living in across your province, how would you describe that?

VICKY LEVACK: Discriminatory. They're locked away and forgotten about. They call me and they say they feel like throwaway people that no one cares about. They feel inhuman. They feel like a body in a bed and not an actual human being. And it's disgusting, and it makes me angry and sad.

MG: Throwaway people?

VICKY LEVACK: Yeah.

MG: That's a really difficult thing to hear.

VICKY LEVACK: Well, good. I'm glad it's difficult because that means, you know, it's wrong.

MG: Vicky, stay with us, I want to bring somebody else into this conversation. Claire McNeil is the lawyer who represents the Disability Rights Coalition in this court case over discrimination. She's sitting with Vicky in her room this morning. Claire, good morning to you.

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Morning, Matt.

MG: At its heart, what is this case about to you?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Well, I think the Court of Appeals said it very clearly that it's an evident truth that to segregate people with disabilities, any people because based on their disability is wrong and in this case, discriminatory. So it's based on that notion that any form of segregation based on a personal characteristic is discriminatory.

MG: There are three specific individuals that were involved in this case, but this is a systemic issue as well as you're arguing it, right?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: The three individuals were emblematic of a widespread, decades long problem that exists here in Nova Scotia. They were not isolated examples, but really just demonstrated the operation of the systemic problem that we face, the practices and policies of our government that result in the unnecessary hospitalization and institutionalization of hundreds and hundreds of people with disabilities over years and decades.

MG: There's a couple of things there, one is the systemic part, and I'll come back to that. But you just said that this is the unnecessary hospitalization and institutionalization of people with disabilities. Tell me more about that. I mean, again, Vicky hinted at that, that they offered her essentially a choice. You can live with your parents until they die and then move into this nursing home. Or you can move into this nursing home now.

CLAIRE MCNEIL: That's right. Like, there are many, many young individuals like Vicky who have been offered as their only option, a nursing home bed. In the case of the three individual complainants, they were in a locked psychiatric ward in one case for 16 years, when all those around them, doctors and other experts were saying there was absolutely no medical or legal reason for them to be there. So it's that type of locked away, segregated congregate care that the province has used in addressing the needs of people with disabilities that's the focus of this case.

MG: And again, that hints at the systemic nature of this. Tell me more about how this expands beyond individual cases and is a systemic failure as you see it.

CLAIRE MCNEIL: So the province of Nova Scotia is one of the last in Canada to address the needs of people with disabilities in a non-discriminatory human rights framework. Every other province has closed the institutions that existed that were... had the effect of segregating people with disabilities, removing them from their communities, and have created inclusive, community based options. So we're lagging far, far behind here in Nova Scotia, and it's not a one by one, you know, based on need kind of approach. It's just a cookie cutter approach that you know, you apply to the program and it's still even though they deny, it's still heavily facility based, they're going to fit you into what they say their programmes provide, as opposed to looking at you as an individual and a human being and designing your supports around your differential needs.

MG: How specifically did the appeals court address that when it ruled in your favour in October?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Well, I think it's very clear on the face of the decision, and it was interesting because, you know, our premier the day after indicated that he had reviewed the decision, and he heard the message of the Court of Appeal loud and clear the evident truth that segregation of people based on disability is wrong.

MG: Vicky, when that ruling came out, that court ruling came out. Did you feel vindicated?

VICKY LEVACK: Yeah, I was like, like, I always knew it was morally wrong. But now there is a court of law saying, no, it's legally wrong, and there's something we can do about it. I thought I was going to die here. And never have a life outside of these walls, never get married, never have children. And I really mourn that. And now here's my chance. I finally have the legal community saying, No, Vicky, you're right, you deserve these things, and we're going to do our damnedest to make sure you get them.

MG: And then things changed with this announcement that the provincial government was going to appeal. What was your reaction to that?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Well, we were blindsided. We had heard the premier say he had understood the message and he wasn't going to force people to go through court to vindicate their rights. He wasn't going to appeal, it was crystal clear. And then to turn around and hear from the press, in fact, that in fact there was going to be an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. But in a way, we shouldn't have been surprised. This province has used every legal angle that they can find to delay and prolong this legal process, during which two of the individual complainants, it has to be said, have died.

MG: The premier said, these are his words, "I don't think anyone should really have to take their government to court to make their government do the right thing. We received the message loud and clear". That to you was a clear indication that this government was not going to appeal.

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Yeah. So that's the assumption that we were going on and we were expecting to move to the next stage... This is a forward looking, you know, human rights process. We're seeking a systemic remedy going forward to change the system to make sure that nobody has to experience the same kind of treatment that these three individuals and people in the position of Vicky Levack are experiencing in this province ever again. But, you know, last week, they said, you know, we need guidance from the Supreme Court of Canada. So we were kind of curious, Well, what exactly are they talking about? And we got their brief to the Supreme Court of Canada this week. So I would suggest to you that if you look at that brief, there's not a single passage in there... We've read their argument where they ask... At no point do they ask for clarification or guidance from the Supreme Court of Canada. They're unhappy with the Court of Appeal decision, and they're seeking to overturn it. It's that simple.

VICKY LEVACK: I had not heard that because all I heard was, we're seeking clarification. But no, no, now I know based on what Claire said they want to overturn, the whole... [whispers] can I say damn?... The whole damn thing, and that makes me really angry.

MG: Well, that's what we heard from the minister who's responsible for this file. Karla MacFarlane. We asked her to be part of this conversation. She declined. They sent us, her office, a statement that reads in part, "the government does not dispute the findings of the individual discrimination, but that many significant questions arise from the Court of Appeals decision that we believe the Supreme Court of Canada may help us resolve". So Claire, if the government doesn't dispute the findings of individual discrimination. Why do you think the government is appealing?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: They're making the same argument to the Supreme Court of Canada that they've been making throughout this human rights process? It was... Their argument was dismissed by the board, dismissed by the Court of Appeal and if accepted, their argument would ensure that no person with disabilities in this province has recourse under the Human Rights Act. They might say that they don't have a problem with the individual's, kind of convenient that two are already dead in this process, while we've been fighting this out for more than seven years. But the other fact... the reality is that if their argument is accepted, there will be no recourse for people with disabilities. There will be no human rights violation. I think we're literally 20 years behind everywhere else and this is part of the problem that the government... this is a problem of the government's own making. It's now come to a crisis point. For instance, they've created a waitlist. It's not a true waitlist in the sense that you really don't know. They just take it... You know, they tell you to take a number when you call for supports and services to live in the community if you have a disability and people wait years and decades without any real sense about when that's going to materialize. Many, many people just never get access. People are literally dying like the individuals in this case without getting access to the kind of supports and services that they need to live in the community.

MG: What does this case tell you about how we as a society treat people who live with a disability?

VICKY LEVACK: May, may I answer that.

MG: Absolutely.

VICKY LEVACK: What this case has taught me and the fact that they're going to fight it, is that they don't view us as people as worthy of the same things that they take for granted every day. They view us as a burden, I think, and that's not right. Just because I need help and it took me years to learn this for myself. Just because I need help, that does not make me a burden. Every human needs help and needing help makes me human and I am worthy of the help. And I'm not a burden. I am a person and just because I have a disability. That's not my fault. I did not ask for this. I did nothing to cause this. And even if I did, that doesn't make me any less worthy of being part of my community.

MG: If you could speak, Vicky, to the premier, what would you say to him?

VICKY LEVACK: OK, so this is radio, so I'm going to have to censor myself because what I would say can't be played on the radio. How dare you, sir? How dare you deny, not only me but hundreds and hundreds of other people their human rights.

MG: You're part of a pilot project with a new sort of living situation, and you're going to be moving out of this nursing home in the future. Vicky, tell me where you're going to be moving to.

VICKY LEVACK: I am moving to a condo in Halifax in the community. It's a joint project between the Department of Community Services and the Department of Health. I'm very happy that I get to move out. Again, I thought I was going to die in here and I'm not. So that's excellent. But if they think that by giving me this home, they're going to shut me up. They're dead wrong. I will not shut up until every single human being has that access.

MG: What are you most looking forward to in the condo?

VICKY LEVACK: Being able to cook my own damn food and eat whenever I damn well, please.

MG: No more mashed potatoes,

VICKY LEVACK: No more freaking mashed potatoes ever again! I will not allow them in my house.

MG: I wish you the best in the move. And Claire, what happens next in this case?

CLAIRE MCNEIL: It's a discouraging process. You know, even since we began this human rights complaint, the wait list maintained by the Department of Community Services has more than doubled. So the longer the government prolongs the legal proceeding and puts things off. Unfortunately, the bigger the problem becomes and the harder it will be for us to solve. But that's not a reason not to tackle it.

MG: We'll be watching.

CLAIRE MCNEIL: Thank you.

VICKY LEVACK: And I have one more thing to add.

MG: Go ahead.

VICKY LEVACK: If the Premier thinks he's doing a great job, sir, I issue a challenge to you. I have saved enough money to pay for my own care for one day. I will spend those 24 hours at my parent house and you can sleep in my nursing home bed. And you have to act like me. So if you need to go to the bathroom, you have to wait, if you are hungry, and it's not meal time. Too bad for you. And see how you like it because obviously you don't understand the crisis we are in.

MG: Vicky, it's great to speak with you. Thank you very much.

VICKY LEVACK: Thank you so much.

MG: Take care of yourself. Bye bye.

VICKY LEVACK: Bye.

MG: Vicky Levack is a member of the Disability Rights Coalition of Nova Scotia. Claire McNeil is a lawyer who represents the Coalition. They're both in Halifax. We also asked the Premier of Nova Scotia, Tim Houston, to be part of this conversation. He declined. The CBC news is next. And then:

FEMALE VOICE: When the students found out yesterday, when I went in, they were telling me how they think it's not fair and how it just doesn't make any sense.

MG: Fatemeh Anvari's grade three students are not the only ones to think her removal from her teaching position is unfair and senseless. Social and political battle lines are being redrawn in Quebec and beyond over Bill 21. That story coming up in six minutes. My name is Matt Galloway and you're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One.

[Music: Theme]

Parents are upset after teacher removed over hijab

Guests: Kirsten Taylor-Bosman, Paul MacInnis and Anthony Housefather

MG: Good morning, I'm Matt Galloway, and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: Theme]

MG: Still to come, we're going back to Kamloops, British Columbia, where one Metis organization is helping youth who've been through the foster care system and reconnecting them with their culture. But first to Quebec, where politics, race and culture refuse to be separated.

[Music: Theme]

FATEMEH ANVARI: I want it to be made clear that this is not just like a personal story, it's so much beyond that, and it's not even about the right to wear a hijab. It's not just that it's so much bigger, it's so many people that this is affecting and not just in terms of people who want to wear a religious symbol who want to be themselves at work, which is very important, but also the lesson that this teaches the kids who are the future. You know, and I think that we as educators that that is a big concern to us.

MG: That's Fatemeh Anvari speaking on As It Happens. She taught grade three in Chelsea, Quebec, until last week when she was removed from her position because she wears a hijab. Under the province's Bill 21 civil servants in positions of authority are not allowed to wear visible religious symbols on the job.

FATEMEH ANVARI: My position on the hijab that I wear is not necessarily religious. For me, it's an identity piece. I am Muslim, I am a practising Muslim, but this hijab that I wear is my personal empowerment and that it's not necessarily religious.

MG: Parents received an email on December 3rd letting them know that their teacher was... their children's teacher was being reassigned. And many of those parents are speaking out. Paul MacInnis and Kirsten Taylor-Bosman both have daughters in what was until last week Fatemeh Anvari's class, and they join us now. Good morning to you, both.

BOTH: Good morning.

MG: Kirsten, tell me about Ms. Anvari. What was she like as a teacher?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: Well, we only really had her for about a month before she had to leave, but I remember asking my daughter what she thought when she first started in the class and she was really excited about her. She came home saying, you know, she was so nice and she liked when she would read to the class. And she just seems like a very warm, caring teacher and we were happy that she was there.

MG: Paul, what about you? How did your daughter Nora feel about Ms. Anvari?

PAUL MACINNIS: Yeah, I think we have the same feedback. She was very positive, very intelligent, very professional. You know, she encouraged Nora to write her stories and she loved to laugh with the kids and it was just a creative and positive environment.

MG: And so how, Paul, did you explain to your daughter what happened to her teacher that she was no longer going to be her teacher because she wears a hijab?

PAUL MACINNIS: Well, that was the... I think we all struggled with that one, Kirsten, and we still struggle with it and I kind of fell back on pushing it back on the elected officials that we, you know, put our trust in, you know, they are stewards of our best interests, but you know, in this case, we just fundamentally disagree with this law and where they're at and. And that's why we have taken the position to put more out there and put the information out there to try to stop this Bill 21. You know, to us, you know, I don't know how to explain it exactly, but it just feels so fundamentally wrong.

MG: You've really struggled with this, you can hear it in your voice. You really struggled with this.

PAUL MACINNIS: You know, and that's the funny part. Like, I'm, you know, I'm an organ transplant coordinator. I have, you know, difficult conversations for a living, you know, but for us to sit down and have this conversation with the kids, it was emotional. It was difficult, you know? And yeah, it was certainly an eye opener for me. So and my wife and like for all of us, I think for the community, for. You know, I think we get busy in the grind of life. You keep your head down and pay the bills and do your thing and you assume that, uh, you know, like I said our elected officials are looking out for us. But, you know, we heard of Bill 21, and you come across, well, you know, that's terrible. It's incredible. And we thought the courts would take care of it and it would never really impact anyone's life. And then here it just landed on our doorstep. And I feel like it's imperative that we take some initiative to let our opinions be known here.

MG: Kirsten, your daughter Ellen made a card for Ms. Anvari, and I'm looking at it right now. Can you describe it?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: Yeah, she drew a picture of herself giving her teacher a hug and they're saying hi to each other, and she drew her wearing her hijab. And then the card says, I really miss you. You were a great teacher. I liked when you read books to us. It's not fair that you can't teach. I actually think your hijab is awesome and you're the best teacher ever.

MG: What did you think when you saw that card?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: It's just so her. I mean, when she's upset about something, she makes a card. So when she drew it, it kind of took my breath away because it was just, it was the perfect thing to say and draw. And it was so, so much in her eyes how she saw the whole situation.

MG: The premier of Quebec, Francois Legault, has said that Bill, 21, has been the law since 2019 and that because of that, Kirsten, this teacher shouldn't have been hired in the first place. What do you make of that?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: I just, I disagree with that so much, because as hard as it's been in our children and in our community to go through all this. I'm so glad it happened because I think of all the people who are not being hired because of this law. So at least it's throwing a spotlight on what's happening here. I mean, this is Canada. How can this happen in Canada?

MG: What are you doing aside from... I mean, this is... The image of the card has ended up on social media and people have seen it across the country and around the world. What else are you doing to show Ms. Anvari support?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: Well, we all sent cards to her, so she knew that we were behind her and we're sending letters to politicians. We hung green ribbons on the fence because that's her favourite colour. But people are, you know, coming together we're... There's a protest planned, you know, people are planning meetings. Somebody wrote a song, but we're really kind of holding our breath because we're waiting for our leaders to help us. We can't end this discrimination without them.

MG: And what would you want from those leaders?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: I want them to challenge the law, and I want it gone.

MG: Paul, how do you understand this, because the polls show that more than 60 percent of Quebeckers support Bill 21, they want Quebec to be secular, and they believe that this bill is a big part of that. How do you understand that in the province that you live in?

PAUL MACINNIS: I literally cannot believe that. And I'd like to review those polls because I honestly and truly do not believe that that's representative of the Quebec that I know.

MG: As an Anglo Quebecer, do you feel as though there's something about the province that perhaps you feel disconnected from in some way?

PAUL MACINNIS: I didn't, you know, until all this came to light, I think and you know, some of the comments that Premier Legault has made over this too about, you know, that they never should have hired her. Fatemeh, you know, and the things he said like... She could wear her hijab when she goes to the store or out in the community, but just not which is teaching in school. It kind of just highlights, I think that they don't... He doesn't understand. It's not like a baseball cap that she can throw in the corner and then come home from work and put it back on, and that's it, you know? I think there needs to be, you know, federal input here too. And there's a need for cultural sensitivity training. I think it's you know, to be blunt, I think it seems unnatural. It's certainly un-Canadian. And you know, and I am appalled that the federal government hasn't stepped in yet with this Bill and... You know, the provincial federal cowardice there. I don't know what you know... I think those things are above my pay grade, but you know it just... the whole process has been very disheartening. And we're frustrated for sure. And Kirsten and the community that you know, we live in, is not ready to let this go. And certainly want to, you know, I'd love to have Prime Minister Trudeau... He lives close. Come to this, you know... The rally that we're going to have on Thursday and speak to the kids about this and try to make sense of it to them, you know, they're nine years old trying to, you know, I... It's troubling for sure.

MG: Kirsten, just before I let you go, I mean, does it make you think differently about the province that you live in, the community that you live in?

KIRSTEN TAYLOR-BOSMAN: This is not... For me, this is not who the people of Quebec are. They're great people, they are warm, caring people. And when you see the reality of this law, this law is heartless. This is discrimination. This is what it looks like in real life with real people, and it doesn't represent the people of Quebec.

MG: I'm glad to speak with you both. Thank you very much.

BOTH: Thank you.

MG: Paul MacInnis and Kirsten Taylor-Bosman both have children who were in Fatemeh Anvari's class Fatemeh Anvari was reassigned because she wears a hijab, and Quebec's Bill, 21, prohibits civil servants in positions of authority from wearing visible religious symbols.

FRANCOIS LEGAULT: I think it's a reasonable law, a balanced law, only employees in positions of authority, including teachers, should not wear religious symbols while on duty at home, in the street. You can do what they want. And Quebec has made the choice of secularism, and I think it must be respected.

MG: That's Quebec Premier Francois Legault defending Bill 21. Anthony Housefather is the Liberal MP for Mount Royal in Quebec, and he joins us now. Anthony, Housefather, good morning to you.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Good morning, Matt.

MG: Do you believe that this is a reasonable law?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: No, I believe it's a discriminatory law. It's a law that fundamentally misunderstands the construct, the separation of church and state. I mean, it's, you know, the separation of church and state is supposed to mean that the state prefers no religion. It doesn't mean that the state is supposed to ban individuals from practising their religion, including wearing religious symbols in public or at work. And I think it's very unfortunate that we have such a law.

MG: When Francois Legault says that this is something that the province of Quebec itself has decided on and that must be respected. Do you believe that the provinces' right to enact this law must be respected by the rest of the country?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, no, I opposed this law when it was before the provincial legislature, and I oppose it today, and I think that Canadians across the country have the right to say whether they agree or don't agree with provincial or federal proposed bills or laws. You know, obviously it will be up to the Legislature of Quebec in the end to determine what to enact. But I see no reason why Canadians across the country would not be able to express themselves and say what they think about the Quebec bill. The end result would be up to the National Assembly to decide. And it was. But it doesn't mean we need to agree with it.

MG: Has your party supported you in opposing this law?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I think so. I think there's been a pretty unequivocal condemnation of Bill 21 from the beginning from the federal Liberal Party.

MG: Really.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I don't think...

MG: Hold on, let me ask you about that. Do you truly believe that there has been an unequivocal condemnation of this law from the Liberal Party from the beginning?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Yeah, I actually do. I mean, as opposed to the conservatives where you've had a number of members who supported Bill 21 in Quebec. I don't know any of my liberal colleagues in Quebec that supported Bill 21. I think we were against it. I think we made clear we were against it. And I think we need to show moral leadership to Canadians to make it clear that we're against it.

MG: I think one of the reasons why people might question whether there has been moral leadership from the Liberals in particular in this is that the prime minister, after the English language leaders debate in the last election, took great offence to a question that was asked about this. Shachu Kurl, the moderator called Bill 21, in her words, a discriminatory law. The prime minister said this was an offensive question that implied Quebeckers are racist. Do you think that that was an offensive question to suggest that Bill 21 is discriminatory, words that you yourself have used?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: So, I think that there's a different role for politicians and moderators in debates that are ostensibly supposed to be neutral. So I actually think that, you know, I wouldn't have asked the question the way she did in the debate. I think there was a whole hullabaloo about it that perhaps, you know, exceeded what you would expect.

[Cross talk]

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: She should have said the courts in Quebec could determined that Bill 21 is discriminatory as opposed to using her own perspective. But again, I think what we really need to get back to is how do we stop bills like Bill 21 from becoming law in Canada? And to me, Matt, if I have a chance, the real question here is the notwithstanding clause, and I think we need to have a societal revisiting of the notwithstanding clause in the charter and the way that governments can simply override fundamental rights under section two of the charter by simple majority votes in a pre-emptive way.

MG: I think... And we can talk about that in a moment, but I think the question that I asked is about why the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, would say that that question implying that Bill 21 is discriminatory would be offensive. People have suggested that this is not anything more than a simple political transaction no party leader would criticise directly Bill 21, or at the very least, every party leader suggested that that question somehow implied that Quebeckers were racist because people believe that those parties needed votes in Quebec, where the bill is popular to form government. Is it as simple as that, a political transaction?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Well, again, I think we've been pretty clear that we're against Bill 21, and I think whenever the prime minister has spoken, he's said he's against Bill 21. I think that now we're turning it to whether or not a question asked by a moderator during a debate was done in a way that was done in a proper way. I also again would say that I listened to that question. I didn't think the question was properly asked either. That doesn't mean. That anyone in the federal Liberal Party that I know of supports Bill 21 and the prime minister has been very clear that he's against Bill 21.

MG: Was there a specific strategy within the party during the election campaign on how to deal with this issue when people raised the issue of Bill 21?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I can only say that any time that I have spoken about Bill 21, I've been very, very clear. I don't think that there was one line on it other than that we opposed it and that the matter was before the courts and that we supported plaintiffs bringing actions based on the Charter of Rights.

MG: You tweeted the other day, how do we complain about human rights in other countries when this, this being the teacher losing her job, happens here? What specifically were you referring to?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I'm referring to the fact that this is a situation where it's inherently unfair to the teacher. It's unfair to the students. It's unfair to the parents who are now getting a third teacher in the classroom. It's unfair to the school administration. It's unfair to the Chelsea community. And the most insidious thing about this is we only noticed it because the school board made a mistake and hired someone who was wearing a hijab and then found out that they couldn't, as opposed to recognizing that for the last couple of years, people have not been allowed to be hired into these positions or promoted to new positions if they wear religious symbols. And so most of this discrimination that's occurring is disguised because people don't know what's happening. Now we have a visible impact that people are seeing and people are raising up. But this is happening much more than just this one case.

MG: Do you believe it's incoherent that the Canadian government would criticise, to your point, human rights in other countries when we're seeing a similar thing happening here?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I think the Canadian government should be equally criticising this discrimination in Canada as human rights abuses in other countries. The fact is that when we have ambassadors in foreign countries that are making the point that human rights needs to be upheld in those countries and people in those countries can turn back and say, but in your own country, a teacher just lost their job because they're wearing a religious symbol. I think it undermines Canadian foreign policy and Canada's ability to stand up for human rights abroad. And I'm ashamed, you know, to see something like this happen in my own country.

MG: Which I guess is why there are a lot of people who scratch their heads again, going back to the election that this wasn't a more forceful issue, and it ends up being boiled down to the way that a moderator's question was phrased.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: You know, again, Matt I can't speak to how people run an election campaign or vote other than if this came up at the door. And I have to say that this came up at the door frequently, you know, in the 2019 election campaign. Given that the law was no longer before the Legislature, it had been passed, it was before the courts. I had very few people that raised Bill 21 in this election campaign, as opposed to Bill 96, which is currently before the Legislature. And when anybody raised it. I said the exact same thing that I've said since this bill was first proposed, which is that it is a very discriminatory bill. It infringes the fundamental rights under section two of the charter, and it shouldn't be the law in any province in Canada. And again, my position has always been that we should be looking at the reform of the notwithstanding clause, whether as I prefer the abolition of it or alternatively at least making sure that you can't use it preemptively or you can't have simple majorities in the Legislature pass using the notwithstanding clause to undermine fundamental freedoms. That's the real problem here, because it's not only going to be Bill 21, there can be other bills all across the country. Quebec is no different than other provinces or the national government, everybody or then the federal parliament. Everybody can use the notwithstanding clause.

MG: In the meantime, teachers are being or a teacher has been fired from her classroom and this could happen elsewhere in the public service. Do you want your government to be an intervenor in this court challenge?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I want our government to unequivocally be a political leader in this fight? I think that certainly the court challenge depends on whether or not the federal Department of Justice and the Justice Minister believe that we have arguments to add to the plaintiffs case that will assist the courts. So I don't want to confuse the political and judicial branches, but certainly I'm hopeful that we have additional arguments to bring.

MG: And thus far, do you believe that your party, your government has been a leader in this fight against Bill 21?

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: I mean, again, I think that if you go back to the original debate on Bill 21 before the Quebec Legislature, we were pretty unequivocal that we were against Bill 21. And I think that that has been the case throughout and will continue to be the case. I can only speak for myself when you ask, you know, what have you said? What I've said has been pretty consistent. I think that this is a very bad bill. And you know, and I very much hope that Quebec society starts recognizing as a whole, is that this should not be the law in Quebec. It's crazy to believe that the only place in North America where a Jewish man wearing kippah, a sikh man wearing a turban or a Muslim woman wearing a hijab can't be a teacher in a public school, is in Quebec. It definitely is a very sad thing.

MG: Anthony Housefather will leave it there. It's good to speak with you. Thank you very much.

ANTHONY HOUSEFATHER: Anytime and have a great day.

MG: Anthony Housefather is the MP for Mount Royal Quebec parliamentary secretary, as well for public services and procurement. This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. This week, we'll continue our coverage on climate change. Mucky peatlands may not catch the eye as much as a tall forest filled with beautiful trees, but peats and bogs store more carbon than other vegetation. All other vegetation in the world combined, in fact, and they are home to some of the rarest plants and animals on Earth. And yet not everyone sees the glory in these low slung landscapes. Ed Struzik does, though, Ed Struzik is a fellow at the Queens Institute for Energy and Environmental Policy. He has studied swamp lands everywhere, including during a powerful visit to Banks Island in the Far North.

ED STRUZIK: Banks Island is in the Arctic archipelago. It's one of the thirty six thousand islands in that huge cluster of islands, but it's also one of the most beguiling. We did a one month trip down the Thompson River through the peatlands from the central north end of the island, and I was just mesmerised by what we saw. There were, at that time 88,000 Muskox, which represented more than two thirds of all the muskox in the world. There were inexplicably six different types of fish in the river, including giant lake trout. There were a population of Arctic wolves that are genetically distinct from other wolves in Canada and from the world. There are hundreds of thousands of snow geese that nest on the island, and I was trying to figure out why this place and not any other place. I mean, there are peatlands in different parts of the Arctic, but nothing quite as astonishing as this. And I realised the reason why is that it is all covered in peat. Three or four metres thick peat, and it's a medium for growth of various different plants that can feed all of these animals. And these animals don't need to move off to other islands across the sea ice. They can just stay there. And so it was really a magical place, and I just at that point just got really interested in peat and peatlands and what they really represented.

MG: That's Ed Struzik. His latest book is called Swamplands, Tundra Beavers, Quaking Bogs and the Improbable World of Peat. He'll be here in the coming days to tell us all about the wonderful world of peat. Coming up in about 15 minutes time. The power of medical diagrams to diversify health care. Why a black illustrator and aspiring neurosurgeon is creating more inclusive images. And what those images could do in terms of changing not even how people think about care, but the care they receive. My name is Matt Galloway. You're listening to The Current on CBC Radio One. We're back in 90 seconds. Stay with us.

[Music: Theme]

Kamloops housing complex helps youth out of foster care and artist wants more black representation in textbooks

Guests: Melba, Steven and Chidiebere Ibe

MG: Hi, I'm Matt Galloway, you're listening to The Current. Last month I was in Kamloops, British Columbia, and had the chance to continue a conversation that began in that city this summer. The discovery of 215 unmarked graves on the grounds of the former Kamloops Indian Residential School sparked a national dialogue about the lasting impacts of residential schools and for many. Part of that lasting impact is the current child welfare system, where indigenous children are put into foster care and cut off from links to their families and their culture. Lii Michif Otipemisiwak is a family and community services centre that's been working to change that. They recently opened a program for young people aging out of foster care. It's a residence where they get paired up with an elder to heal and reconnect with their heritage. Steven Hicks has been there from the start. He was part of the construction crew that built Kikekyelc, it's a place of belonging. Melba Stirling was one of the first elders to move in, and I met them in the kikuli of the building. It's a beautiful space. I'll let them describe it.

MELBA STIRLING: It's in the shape of a tepee. A traditional Aboriginal home. It's unique because it's round.

STEVEN HICKS: You've got an open... I don't even know what you call that, just an open window at the top.

MELBA STIRLING: The skylight, there's windows all round. The table is beautiful. It's in round shape. All wood and in the centre is a robe. And it's... I think it's a bearskin or buffalo. I can't see that far, but it's beautiful here.

STEVEN HICKS: This is actually the nicest room in this building. Making it was kind of tricky.

MG: What is it like to be in a place that you helped build?

STEVEN HICKS: It is quite gratifying because I never had this much accomplishment before and self worth. But [inaudible] have supported me pretty much through it all, and they've never given up on me. So it's been really nice.

MG: Steven Hicks is 26. He spent most of his life in foster care. I asked Melba Stirling why she wanted to live at Kikekyelc.

MELBA STIRLING: I feel that at this age of my... stage of my life, that I'm being productive and I can share my experience, and I like to see the change in people. So from where they started to where they end up, I've always been very excited to see the change. All of my experience has been around working with families and children. The youth are very respectful here as well with me, which I really enjoy. My life before this was getting quite lonely, so I'm glad to be part of the world here.

MG: You mentioned your experience. Tell me a little bit about, if you don't mind, tell me a bit about you and your life growing up.

MELBA STIRLING: Yes, I'm Metis from northern Alberta. I was born on a Metis settlement and I lived there till I was about 15 and then went away to boarding school. And then I got married young and I had my children young. And so I use all my experience to help the youth here. I worked in the area as a youth worker, family support worker and I was a foster mom at one point as well. And during my full time employment, I worked as a children's advocate as well.

MG: What do you see as your role as an elder in residence here?

MELBA STIRLING: More as like a grandmother, a teacher, a guide, an advisor to someone that they could come to? I don't judge them so that they can tell me anything they want. I've probably either experienced it myself or I've seen it before, and I'm not shocked by anything.

MG: What do you think that means to some young people who are here who perhaps did not have that relationship with a grandparent that you're describing? And so for you to be that open, receptive, honest ear, what does that mean to them, do you think?

MELBA STIRLING: I think it's something that they probably have missed out on. We long to have that in our lives where we have someone that we can go to and that feels like they can talk to honestly and openly. I think we all need that as people.

MG: Steven Hicks, I mentioned that you had aged out of the foster care system. How did you enter the foster care system? Would you mind talking a bit about that?

STEVEN HICKS: Well, when I was half a year old, my real parents were very neglectful and the ministry decided to come in and take us out of there. And they did because we were living in a very healthy living situation. And I got sent to a foster home right after that with one of my siblings and stayed there for about seven years and got adopted after that. State adopted for four years and then I was back in the foster system until I was about 18/19.

MG: That shaped who you are, that whole experience?

STEVEN HICKS: Growing up, I had no idea how that shaped me. I actually only learnt about this summer, all the past trauma and all the experiences I went through, how much it actually affected me. So I'm still currently in the process of learning and how to cope with all those feelings and all these emotions that I didn't know I had. It's a struggle. I thought I was going to be homeless. I like... when you age out of care they don't teach you anything. So I was kind of all alone. I didn't really know what to do, didn't know about budgeting, didn't know life skills, how to cook, anything like that.

MG: That's a very abrupt transition.

STEVEN HICKS: Yeah.

MG: One of the things that is fascinating about this place is that it is a program for indigenous and Metis youth. Many of the young people who come here don't know in some ways who they are. That part of the program here is about not even connecting people with who they are, but teaching people who they are.

STEVEN HICKS: Mostly about teaching and pretty much everything... The foster system destroyed all of our culture. So when we come here, we're confused. They're like, here, here's jigging, here's hash making, here's elders, here's cooking. Here's all this, but it's all new to us. We didn't have that growing up. So, of course, it's very confusing, but it's also an opportunity that somehow we have to take.

MG: When did you learn about your roots? When did you learn that you were Metis?

STEVEN HICKS: When I was 19.

MG: What did that mean for you? I mean, was that an easy...

STEVEN HICKS: Of course not. No, I fought it at first because I didn't believe I was Metis. I didn't feel I had the right to be Metis.

MG: You felt you didn't have the right?

STEVEN HICKS: Yeah. Well, of course. I mean, I've grown up in a white culture. I can go to a powwow tomorrow and I wouldn't feel included because I'm white, like, you wouldn't think I'm Aboriginal because I'm pretty darn white. So it was very confusing. And even now I still struggle, but I'm more open minded about it because I know they're just here to help me and they want the best for me, and they keep telling me over and over and over again and it's slowly starting to sink in.

MG: When you say it destroyed your culture, I mean, people... That's why people make a direct comparison in some ways between the foster care system and the residential school system. Do you see that connection?

STEVEN HICKS: Oh, there's a huge connection. I think the term I used yesterday was a modernized residential school.

MG: A modernised residential school.

STEVEN HICKS: It's pretty much a legal residential school. It's a system that they put in place, which they thought would completely destroy our, Metis culture in my case. And it did succeed. But now I'm starting to find my roots, and I do identify as Metis. And even though it's kind of confusing but... No, the foster care system, they don't even let you know that you're Aboriginal. They don't let you keep a connection with any of your past. They do everything they can to push you away from it. I get that it's all about the safety and well-being and all that. But Aboriginals need their family and they need those roots.

MG: This is an amazing place for a lot of reasons, and one of the reasons is even just in the name when it's called a place of belonging. Part of that is also about helping people not even just embrace identity, but also as we were hearing, learn about their identity. Melba Stirling, what do you see as your role in that?

MELBA STIRLING: Well, I talk about my upbringing as a young person on the Metis settlement and that I was raised with my parents, which I feel very fortunate that I was, and I'm still very close with my family. I'm going to reconnect with my Cree culture. And my first language was Cree. And so I'm going to pick up on that language again. It's a little rusty at this point. I haven't had a chance to use it too much because of my work and where I lived.

MG: But it's still really important to you.

MELBA STIRLING: It is very important.

MG: Why?

MELBA STIRLING: Well, it's a source of pride and a connection to who I am, and I'd like to share that with the youth, that they belong.

MG: I was going to say, is that something that you would share with someone like Steven? I mean, he was talking earlier about feeling initially sort of uncomfortable and struggling with his Metis identity. What do you say to Steven or others who might be going through those similar struggles?

MELBA STIRLING: Well, I think I would share the fact that I've been there. When I was younger it was embarrassing sometimes. And sometimes, you know, I faced discrimination and racism when I was young. So if I had had pride in being Metis, when I was facing those things, it would have been a lot easier. So I think if you have that in your life, you can face anything. You have pride and you have roots somewhere and you have the language and you have family and you can connect with other Metis people as well.

MG: A lot of the work that you've done is, as you mentioned, based around family.

MELBA STIRLING: Yes.

MG: Your own family... And I wonder whether there's roots in this. Your mother and your uncle attended residential school?

MELBA STIRLING: My mother did.

MG: Your mother did.

MELBA STIRLING: And my uncle also. They didn't stay in residential school very long. But luckily, what happened while they entered that system was, their father passed away and my grandmother couldn't support them financially. So she was convinced by the church that the church could look after them better than she could. So they went and they entered the system. But very quickly, my grandmother realized that they weren't taken care of very well. So she took them back and... but my mother had a lot of memories of that during that time. Negative, negative experience.

MG: How do you think that influenced the work that you've done over the course of your life in terms of helping families and helping children?

MELBA STIRLING: I think I've always wanted to show people that I cared because of that experience in residential school by my mother. She had a hard time expressing her, her love and her affection with us children. There was my siblings, there were seven of us all together and I have two sisters in that group. And us sisters talked about the fact that our mum never hugged us or told us she loved us or shared emotions that way, it was because of that experience in residential school.

MG: And so for you in the work that you've done in some ways, you're providing that for others.

MELBA STIRLING: I hope so. And I hope that, you know, just showing, especially here, I want to show the youth that you know, that I care and that I want them to learn the skills so that they become successful when they leave here and that they become productive people as well.

MG: Steven, this place changed your life.

STEVEN HICKS: Yes, most definitely.

MG: What do you mean by that? That's a remarkable thing to say.

STEVEN HICKS: Yeah, I would still be drinking. I'm actually a recovering alcoholic. I've been sober, seven months. I would probably be homeless. I'd be in a very dark space right now.

MG: And when did that start to change for you?

STEVEN HICKS: If I had to choose, one thing is being... having the same people, the same environment, just one place, that nothing changes. I never had that growing up. I always had different parents, different siblings, different schools, different towns. But being able to stay in one spot starts a strong foundation. And then from a strong foundation, you grow into a tree that can't be moved. A current worker, Paul, he just kind of gave me a kick in the ass. Pretty much told me there's no more excuses. You can keep going down the path you're going down, self-destructive, making everything bad for really it all starts with you. Somehow, something he said to me and just clicked. And I've been working very hard not to be my past self.

MG: How does that feel?

STEVEN HICKS: It feels great, but it's also uncomfortable because I'm still growing right? I don't know who I really am. I don't know who I really will be. It's confusing, but it's a journey and I've learned that you have to go outside your comfort zone to progress in life. If you stay in the same spot nothing changes. So pretty much when a youth comes here and they're under age or they are 19, I pretty much tell them, take advantage of this. You're not going to find another place that you can stay at for over 10 years and be safe. You won't have to worry about anything and have all these natural supports. You won't find something like that anywhere else. This is just comfortable, safe. Of course, things sometimes do happen, but you make it what you want to make it, and I made it home.

MELBA STIRLING: I'm really proud of Steven, and he's a star here, and I'm so happy that he took part of this conversation. He is a very private person, but to open up and to start speaking of these things, I'm very proud of him.

STEVEN HICKS: Thank you Melba, for being here for actually joining this program and deciding to move into this building. Even though you guys don't know it, your effect on youth and me and staff is a lot stronger than you think.

MG: What do you think someone like Melba can help with?

STEVEN HICKS: It's just nice to have someone to talk to. No judgements, no hassle, no anything. But the thing I've noticed is they've always got words of wisdom to say, even though they don't realize it. And there's... kind of one of their favourite teachings is they teach you stuff so that hopefully you learn and understand from it, and then you can teach future generations. So it's an ongoing cycle.

MG: We talk a lot on this program this season about resilience and what it means to be resilient. What does that word mean to you?

MELBA STIRLING: I think of it as building up the strength within yourself to believe in yourself and to believe that there are good people out there that can help you and to gravitate towards those people and to think positively rather than to go to the negative. Because to be resilient, you need to bend, you need to move. It's like a small tree, a sapling, and that moves with the wind and yet it is strong, but sometimes a very large tree a wind will break it, but a sapling is still fluid and mobile, and that's how I see the youth here as they're saplings they need to believe in themselves so that they can carry on in the future and have good futures for themselves, rather than falling into the negative things.

MG: And for you, Steven. That word resilience means what to you?

STEVEN HICKS: You instinctively want to fight back. So resilience for me is, I guess, the opposite view. You’ve got to learn how to not always fight back because not everyone is out there to hurt you or to put you down or anything negative. Some people are literally out there just to try to help you.

MG: And that's something that you've learned over time?

STEVEN HICKS: I'm still learning it. Like I still fight the current sometimes, but I'm more open. Coming here was a turning point in my life.

MG: You'll have another turning point next year when you age out of this program.

STEVEN HICKS: That's correct.

MG: How do you feel about that?

STEVEN HICKS: Definitely anxious because it feels like when you move out of here, it will be a repeat of what happened in the system with the ministry. However, I know, I know personally, it won't be like that. But I feel that it will be because it's already happened to me before.

MG: Do you feel ready?

STEVEN HICKS: No. I'm doing all I can to get ready, get a licence, save up as much money, work on budgeting, building natural supports because I know a year after here I won't have a worker anymore. It'll be just me. And they are helping me to make sure I'm the best me that I can be to get done.

MG: Thank you both.

BOTH: Thank you.

MG: Steven Hicks and Melba Sterling both live at Kikekyelc, a place of belonging in Kamloops.

[Music: calm base instrumental].

MG: This is The Current on CBC Radio One. My name is Matt Galloway. If you open a medical textbook today, the pictures on those pages will tell you a story of their own. A story that is largely about white people. Nearly every diagram in medical literature depicts someone Caucasian. Which is why a diagram of a pregnant black woman has caught the attention of people around the world. The person who drew that image is my next guest, Chidiebere Ibe, is a medical illustrator. He's also about to begin studying to become a paediatric neurosurgeon. He's in Lagos, Nigeria. Chidiebere Ibe, hello.

CHIDIEBERE IBE: Hello. Nice being on the show today.

MG: It's great to have you. Where did this idea come from? How did you decide that creating medical diagrams that feature black people was something that you wanted to do?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: So the idea came from my mentor, Dr. Sidney. I realised that there were no black illustrations, which made it difficult for me to learn and teach myself because I'm a self-taught medical illustrator. So in the journal learning, I reached out to him and said all drawings are white skin. So he said, Oh, fantastic, so let's work towards making them black skin.

MG: When you looked through those diagrams and you saw the lack of racial diversity, what went through your mind when you initially saw that?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: I mean, it ought not to be so, because first of all, it made learning for me very difficult. When I was learning, I had no reference points. I had nothing to use as a reference point and... which made it very difficult for me and also my process of learning. I took a couple of courses online, then I realized that in the public health sector, that community health workers use white illustrations to make advocacies in rural communities in Nigeria or even Africa at large, and really caught my attention because it ought not to be so because you are educating people within the villages and you're using white illustrations to educate them. I mean, there is somewhat of a communication gap there. And we saw that this should be something I should work towards addressing.

MG: A communication gap. Tell me more about that. Why it is that you think it's important that these sorts of illustrations feature a range of skin colours?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: Because medical students are trained to better diagnosing, community health workers are trained to better advocating or educating people out there, but yet the resources and materials used for training are not sufficient enough to advocate. For example, here in Nigeria, in local communities, women cannot speak proper English. They did not understand English at all, but the medical literature used to educate these local women are drawing white skin. I mean, there's somewhat of a communication gap there. The drawings should be in black skin and of course be able to represent their colour and their skin so that even if they do not understand English they should be able to see themselves in the drawing. And of course, better understand and also for medical students in training, when they are being trained in medical school. For example here in Nigeria, all medical textbooks here in Nigeria are all in white skin and the students just study them just to pass their exams, but not study them to know them. And of course, this in turn affects they're interested in learning, and that's also in turn affected their doctor and patient communication. For example, I would see if a patient comes to the clinic and has some key condition and the patient is a black person. The doctor which is not trained to diagnose this condition on a black skin, they won't know how to respond to this patient. So that is how this drawing causes so much lacuna in communication.

MG: So if people don't see themselves in these images, then things get lost in translation in some ways, can fall through the cracks.

CHIDIEBERE IBE: Yes, definitely.

MG: What was it like for you? You make these drawings, and then what was your expectation? I mean, how far did you think that they were going to go? Where did you think they would end up?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: I didn't expect that they would go viral because I had put in a whole lot of drawings over the year. When I put them I said, oh, more of these should be included in medical literature, more of these should be included in medical textbooks. I mean, it was just me speaking of what I believed in. I knew that eventually, even if the world didn't hear this, that I would put these textbooks, publish them for free. I mean, that would be a good way that this message would have gone viral. So I'm happy that they went viral and that the world has heard the message.

MG: They have gone all over the world. I mean, what is that like for you?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: It's really overwhelming because I didn't expect that, but the change is already here and it's to make maximum use of this opportunity and to keep on advocating for what I believe in.

MG: What have you heard back from people in terms of a response to seeing themselves in these diagrams when they normally would see somebody who doesn't look like them?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: Yes. I have had a lot of comments, people have said things like, 50 years in the health sector. I had never seen a black drawing before. People have called me and expressed that deep felt pains and I sincerely resonated with them. I mean, this is how much bias has put deep into the system. And it's amazing that people literally call and cry and say that they could feel alive again. That people feel seen and heard again, through the drawings. That's why it's amazing that this comment really went to my heart because it's not just about people in the health sector but people wanting to be heard and seen.

MG: Why do you think it took so long for people to be heard and seen, as you say?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: People didn't take that as something very important. I mean, the issue of inclusion diversity has always not been a big topic for a very long time. People have always laid that aside, but I tell you if these things were initiated or ensured over time, for example, if our fathers or our historian told us... that making medical illustrations had considered including these drawings earlier in medical literature. Core health care delivery to everybody, to the people of colour, to the [inaudible], it would have been out there over time.

MG: You're about to go off and study to be a neurosurgeon. Why do you want to be a neurosurgeon?

CHIDIEBERE IBE: All right. I want to be a paediatric neurosurgeon first because I love children a lot and I hate seeing children, good though pain. And why I want to be a neurosurgeon is because I love how complex the brain is. And I also want to be a paediatric neuro oncologist because my mom died of cancer. And that's because the health care in Nigeria wasn't sufficient enough to provide good health care that would have saved her life. And I want to be able to better help get everybody, the children out there or my age... and you're much younger than me that cannot take the pains of seeing their loved ones being lost. I want to be able to provide the health care that I was never provided or had never had the privilege of seeing.

MG: You've already made a huge contribution to the medical field before you're even in med school, it's quite, it's quite something. Congratulations and thank you for talking to us.

CHIDIEBERE IBE: Thank you.

MG: Chidiebere Ibe is a medical illustrator in Nigeria and soon to be a medical student. He's off to study paediatric neurosurgery. That's The Current for this Monday. Coming up next on CBC Radio One, its Q. Before we leave you on this Monday we wanted to leave you with a song. This was a Canadian song that in some ways defined a generation. "Signs" is about long haired, freaky people. Performed by the Five Man Electrical Band. It was written by their singer and guitarist, Les Emerson, who was from Ottawa. I did not know that Les Emerson was from Ottawa. Les Emerson died on Friday at the age of 77, and so we'll leave you with the song today that brought him and this band to fame about those long haired, freaky people. I'm Matt Galloway. Thanks for listening to The Current. I'll see you tomorrow.

[Music: Signs by Five Man Electrical Band]

Monday 13 December, 2021 Full Transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode