Abstract: This article introduces the Third Space of Indian child welfare to theorize how Indigenous nations simultaneously engage and disrupt settler legal systems while building sovereign, care-based alternatives. Drawing from legal analysis, Indigenous political thought, and sociohistorical synthesis, I trace the historical continuity from boarding schools to today’s foster care removals, showing how child welfare operates as a colonial apparatus of family separation. In response, Native nations enact governance through three interrelated strategies: strategic legal engagement, kinship-based care, and tribally controlled family collectives. Building on Bruyneel’s theory of third space sovereignty, Simpson’s nested sovereignty, and Lightfoot’s global Indigenous rights framework, I conceptualize the Third Space as a dynamic field of Indigenous governance that transcends binary settler logics. These practices constitute sovereign abolitionist praxis. They reclaim kinship, resist carceral systems, and build collective futures beyond settler rule. Thus, rather than treating the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) as a federal safeguard, I argue that tribes have repurposed ICWA as a legal and political vehicle for relational governance. This reframing challenges dominant crisis-based narratives and positions Indigenous child welfare as the center of a “global Indigenous politics of care” with implications for theories of sovereignty, family, and abolitionist futures across disciplines, geographies, and social groups. The article concludes by reflecting on the broader implications of the Third Space for other Indigenous and minoritized communities navigating state control and asserting self-determined care.




Description: Growing up, Rebecca Clarren only knew the major plot points of her tenacious immigrant family’s origins. Her great-great-grandparents, the Sinykins, and their six children fled antisemitism in Russia and arrived in the United States at the turn of the 20th century, ultimately settling on a 160-acre homestead in South Dakota. Over the next few decades, despite tough years on a merciless prairie and multiple setbacks, the Sinykins became an American immigrant success story. What none of Clarren’s ancestors ever mentioned was that their land, the foundation for much of their wealth, had been cruelly taken from the Lakota by the United States government. By the time the Sinykins moved to South Dakota, America had broken hundreds of treaties with hundreds of Indigenous nations across the continent, and the land that had once been reserved for the seven bands of the Lakota had been diminished, splintered, and handed for free, or practically free, to white settlers. In The Cost of Free Land, Clarren melds investigative reporting with personal family history to reveal the intertwined stories of her family and the Lakota, and the devastating cycle of loss of Indigenous land, culture, and resources that continues today. With deep empathy and clarity of purpose, Clarren grapples with the personal and national consequences of this legacy of violence and dispossession. What does it mean to survive oppression only to perpetuate and benefit from the oppression of others? By shining a light on the people and families tangled up in this country’s difficult history, The Cost of Free Land invites readers to consider their own culpability and what, now, can be done.




Abstract: Background: Indigenous Peoples have been reported to experience higher rates of stroke, poorer access to high-quality acute and rehabilitation stroke services, and worse post- stroke outcomes compared to dominant cultures residing in the same countries. The aim of this statement is to summarise available evidence on access barriers contributing to these inequities, effective solutions that have been deployed and tested, and present key recommendations to advance the field. Methods: We conducted a scoping review searching Medline, Embase, CINHAL, PubMed, Scopus, and Informit Indigenous Collection using the broad search terms “stroke” and “Indigenous” without date restriction until 1 August 2024. We screened 673 unique titles, 96 abstracts, and 80 full text papers of which we retained 41. We added ten additional key references known to authors. Articles were analysed to identify key cross-cutting themes. Results: We identified five key themes: (1) Historical context, colonisation and racism; (2) wholistic strength-based approaches to health, well-being, and recovery; communication, health literacy, and cultural safety; (4) Iindigenous knowledge systems, research principles, and community-led action; (5) achieving local acceptance versus wide generalisability. Recommendations: Key priority areas, detailed in the form of eleven specific recommendations and based on six core values, include improving stroke service responsiveness, Indigenous Peoples empowerment, and Indigenous research support to better meet the needs of Indigenous Populations globally.


Abstract: This article examines the political impact of two rounds of arbitrary expulsions of white and Asian British citizens by the Kenyan government—first in 1964, and then in 1967. It analyses the consolidation of the relationship between the British and Kenyan states after the latter’s independence in 1963, and the evolving position of the white settler community within that equation. The article examines elements of coercion on the part of the Kenyan government, and embarrassment on the part of the British government. The expulsions illustrated the dual objectives driving the British state’s decolonisation process in Kenya—fulfilling its ‘moral obligation’ towards settlers via financial compensation and repatriation at state expense, and safeguarding British political, defence and economic interests in Kenya. The manner of execution of the expulsions was symptomatic of the chaos that characterised the decolonisation process, with the reconfiguration of the existing political order as well as the hierarchy of authority and power within a coalition of individuals with varying ethnic and ideological allegiances. Finally, the article contrasts the privileged treatment accorded to problematic white deportees by the British government with the callous and discriminatory treatment of British Asian expellees. Decolonised countries, having achieved independence through nationalist civilian action, thus learned to appropriate the colonial weapon of sedition against ‘undesirables’ or dissidents and, in this case, to justify arbitrary action against powerful minorities in the name of national security. The deportations in 1964 and 1967 created a precedent that left a lingering sense of fear and uncertainty within the white settler community in Kenya.