Indigenous identity fraud is encouraged in academia. Here's how to change that

This Opinion piece is by Chris Andersen, who is Métis from the Parkland region of Saskatchewan and is currently dean of the Faculty of Native Studies at the University of Alberta.

For more information about CBC's Opinion section, please see the FAQ.

The revelations about Carrie Bourassa's claims to Indigeneity were, in retrospect, not especially surprising to those of us who research Indigenous identity. 

Her story followed a fairly predictable arc. It started with hazy, increasingly confusing and contradictory claims to Indigeneity, moved on to accusations of bullying and lateral violence, then to defenders and detractors arguing with each other on her behalf, followed by attempts to shore up earlier claims and, eventually, silence. 

As I was chatting with colleagues, it occurred to me that — the specifics of this case notwithstanding — there are more important questions to ask. 

What is it about university structures that allows these dynamics to continue? 

More often than not, fraudulent Indigenous identity claims in academia have two key characteristics. 

First, they are based primarily on self-identification that sits somewhere on a spectrum from complete dishonesty, to distant archival ancestors, to the family lore of a dark-skinned or high cheek-boned great/grandparent. Second, they involve no ongoing extended familial connection to an Indigenous community. 

Many Indigenous academics find this fraud both irritating and emotionally draining. It's especially vexing how it seems these false claims are being unearthed at an increasing clip in recent years, and little ever seems to change. It feels like Groundhog Day.

We repeatedly offer advice to university administrators. When — or if — they respond, they cite a lack of explicit policy for dealing with such dynamics. Alternatively, they reply with platitudes about how identity is "complex" and "personal." 

Either way, instead of drawing clear boundaries or committing to establishing structures to prevent further fraud, they vacillate between sitting on their hands and wringing them. 

This leads many overburdened Indigenous scholars to wonder why we waste our time giving advice — not to mention putting ourselves on the firing line for accusations of bullying or lateral violence — only to have it be dismissed. 

Most universities rely on self-identification as the key marker of Indigenous identity claims. 

In some respects, this makes perfect sense. It accords with understandings of Indigeneity that anchor the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and stands in stark contrast to colonial legislation such as the Indian Act, which denies the validity of self-identification.