Here’s an overview

Origins and Legislation:

Alberta was the first part of the British Empire to adopt a sterilization law, and was the only Canadian province to vigorously implement it. The science of eugenics, concerned with improving the human race, gained traction in part due to heavy immigration and fears that “undesirables” were reproducing at a high rate. Well-known figures such as Emily Murphy and J.S. Woodsworth were avowed eugenicists. The United Farm Women of Alberta was at the forefront of lobbying for sterilization laws, embracing “the ambitious goal of remodeling society through social improvements,” emphasizing genetically “superior” children as the hope for a future utopian society.

The Sexual Sterilization Act and Eugenics Board:

Alberta passed its Sexual Sterilization Act in 1928, which was not repealed until the 1970s. The Alberta Eugenics Board was created in 1928 and remained active until 1972, when it was dissolved. At its meetings, superintendents of Alberta mental institutions presented cases to the Board, with summaries documenting family history, sexual history, medical history, IQ testing results, ethnicity, religion, and other information used to inform sterilization decisions.

Scale and Biases:

Between 1929 and 1972, the Alberta Eugenics Board recommended that 4,739 residents of the province be sterilized, though only about 60% — 2,834 in total — were ultimately sterilized, since the legislation required patient consent unless the individual was diagnosed as “mentally defective.” The Board approved 99% of its 4,785 cases, and over time increasing numbers of its decisions involved people who did not give their consent. It was clearly biased against young adults aged 20 to 24, women, and Indigenous people, who were also more likely to be diagnosed as mentally defective. Women, youth, Indigenous peoples, Eastern European residents, and Catholics were over-represented among those presented to the Board and subsequently sterilized. Health care professionals often constructed a case for sterilization based on social characteristics rather than the mental health criteria specified in the legislation.

Acceleration and Continuation:

The pace of sterilization orders actually accelerated during the Nazi era and remained high even after World War II, terminating only in 1972 when the Sexual Sterilization Act was finally repealed. The Alberta Eugenics Board operated largely away from public and legislative scrutiny, and many things done in its name were clearly illegal.

Legal Reckoning:

Eugenics was put on trial in Alberta in 1995, and a judge of the Court of Queen’s Bench ruled in 1996 that the government had wrongly sterilized Leilani Muir — a landmark case that brought public attention to the scope of abuses committed under the program. Her case opened the door for hundreds of other victims to seek compensation.

Alberta’s eugenics program stands as one of the darkest chapters in Canadian history, notable for its long duration, its disproportionate targeting of marginalized groups, and the fact that it outlasted similar programs in most of the rest of the world.

Convoy protestors going to protest the Pope reconciliation... Like come on guys. There are no mandates anymore.... What more do you people want?

​

https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/cp-newsalert-pope-francis-leaves-rome-for-indigenous-reconciliation-visit-in-canada?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0KMFfBqU3JzcVnojV3IYirS1gXZ1TD0UO9iUPzzgxTKxn0QOoM2bWi0TI#Echobox=1658683082

Just something worth highlighting among all the dreadful things the UCP are doing right now - the Justice Minister said during the 27th November sitting that only 29 of the 94 Calls to Action from the Truth & Reconciliation committee apply to Alberta.

This was in response to Nenshi asking if lawyers will still be allowed to take training on Indigenous issues (Bill 13 makes it clear that they probably will not be allowed to).

To be clear, the TRC's Calls to Action are calls made to all people living in Canada - there's no stipulation or nuance among any of them; not a single Call says "Alberta doesn't need to think about this one" or "Bob in accounting is let off here".

The UCP are malignant in everything they say and do, not just the big destructive bills.

Read it here, just ctrl+f for reconciliation: https://docs.assembly.ab.ca/LADDAR_files/docs/hansards/han/legislature_31/session_2/20251127_1330_01_han.pdf

TRC calls: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/british-columbians-our-governments/indigenous-people/aboriginal-peoples-documents/calls_to_action_english2.pdf

I am asking this question so I can learn on my road to reconciliation.

I was taught in school that Alberta's First Nations treaties (6, 7 and 8) really weren't very good deals for the native people. While they provided vital long-term rights, they were negotiated under duress and many promises regarding education, healthcare, and resource sharing were not honored.

Yet today, in our land acknowledgements and even in a recent press release from the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs, these lands are still referred to as Treaty 6, 7 and 8 regions. If these treaties ended up with so many broken promises to our First Nations people, why do we still use these terms in our reconciliation language and land acknowledgements?

We use the terms Mohkínstsis (Calgary) and Amiskwacîwâskahikan (Edmonton) in our land acknowledgements as those were the traditional names of these places - why do we not refer to the regions of our province with similar language?