|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 8 - 23 May 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | Background: Native Hawaiian Racial and Cultural Preservation | |
<
< | Over the last 150 years Native Hawaiians have struggled to survive and maintain a distinct cultural heritage under both government and social pressures to integrate into the American mainstream. In the last century, groups recognizing this struggle and responding to the need for active preservation efforts have been lead both by private community based organizations and (ironically) the government. | >
> | Over the last 150 years, Native Hawaiians have struggled to maintain a distinct cultural heritage while under government and societal pressure to integrate into the American mainstream. In the last century, both private community based organizations and (ironically) government-supported groups have recognized this struggle and responded to the need for active preservation efforts. | | | | |
<
< | The mission of these groups is generally to support and assist the Hawaiian people by identifying Native Hawaiians and providing them with some tangible benefits calculated to decrease the trend of cultural decline. Thus, one way to measure the effectiveness of these efforts is to question the process used to identify Hawaiians. Here I will discuss what the rule is for determining Native Hawaiian status, how that rule was developed, the ways in which the rule is discordant with traditional Hawaiian values, and how the overall effectiveness of revitalization efforts may be jeopardized by this discordance. | >
> | The groups’ general mission has been to support and assist the Hawaiian community by identifying Native Hawaiians and providing them with tangible benefits calculated to reverse the trend of cultural decline. One way to measure the effectiveness of these efforts is to question the process used to identify Hawaiians. The following examination discusses the criteria for determining Native Hawaiian status, how that criteria was developed, the ways in which the criteria is discordant with traditional Hawaiian values, and how the overall effectiveness of revitalization efforts may be jeopardized by this discordance. | | | I. Recognition by Race: The Preference System & the Criteria for Native-ness
A. An Illustration: The HHCA | |
<
< | In 1920, Congress passed the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. The Act provided for homesteads that would “revitalize the Hawaiian people.” Congress provided that a Native Hawaiian could be eligible for leases to reserved homestead lands, but only if the person could prove that they were at least one-half racially Hawaiian. Lessees could designate children as successors to their lease, but the children would also have to meet the one-half blood quantum rule. | >
> | In 1920, Congress passed the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act for homesteads to help “revitalize the Hawaiian people.” Congress provided that a Native Hawaiian could be eligible for leases to reserved homestead lands, but only if the person could prove that he or she was at least one-half racially Hawaiian. Lessees could designate children as successors to their lease, but the children would also have to meet the one-half blood quantum rule. | | | B. The Rule Today: Blood Quantum Required | |
<
< | The one-half rule outlined in the HHCA is one of the harsher blood quantum requirements by a benefit program, but it is used by a handful of organizations and illustrates the method of defining what it means to be Hawaiian by measuring some amount of Hawaiian ancestry. Today, without known exception, programs specifically aimed at providing benefits to Native Hawaiians require that a benefitee have at a minimum one documented racially Native Hawaiian ancestor. This applies both to government and privately run Hawaiian programs. | >
> | The one-half rule outlined in the HHCA is one of the harsher blood quantum requirements of any benefit program. It is used by a handful of organizations and illustrates the method of defining what it means to be Hawaiian by measuring some amount of Hawaiian ancestry. Today, without known exception, programs specifically aimed at providing benefits to Native Hawaiians require that a benefitee have a minimum of one documented racially Native Hawaiian ancestor. This rule applies both to government and privately-run Hawaiian programs. | | | C. The Effects of the Blood Quantum Rule | |
<
< | The problem with using the blood-quantum rule when trying to provide benefits to the entire Hawaiian community is that this form of identification precludes many persons who identify as Hawaiian. For example, adopted persons do not qualify for participation in any of these programs although their entire cultural identity may be learned from Hawaiian adoptive parents and developed through life-long participation in Hawaiian communities. To the extent that minimum blood percentages are required, children of Hawaiian parents also may be barred from access to programs depending upon the spousal choices made by their Hawaiian ancestors. | >
> | The dilemma in using the blood-quantum rule, when seeking to provide benefits to the entire Hawaiian community, is that this form of identification precludes many persons who identify as Hawaiian. For example, adopted persons do not qualify for participation in these programs although their entire cultural identity may be learned from Hawaiian adoptive parents and developed through life-long participation in Hawaiian communities. To the extent that minimum blood percentages are required, children of Hawaiian parents may be barred as well from access to programs due to the spousal choices made by their Hawaiian ancestors. | | | | |
<
< | Using the HHCA illustration, a family may develop and create roots on a piece of land for decades to have it re-possessed by the government when a parent with only adopted children passes or if a Hawaiian who chose a non-Hawaiian spouse is survived by less than 50% Hawaiian heirs. | >
> | Using the HHCA illustration, a family may develop and create roots on a piece of land for decades, only to have it re-possessed by the government when a parent with adopted-only children passes away or if a Hawaiian who chose a non-Hawaiian spouse is survived by heirs who are less than 50% Hawaiian.
These are harsh ramifications affecting a large quantity of Hawaiian family members. It is important to explore in what traditions this rule is grounded and how consistent it is with Hawaiian values and conceptions of identity. | | | | |
<
< | These are harsh ramifications affecting a large quantity of Hawaiian family members. Thus it is important to explore in what traditions this rule is grounded and how consistent it is with Hawaiian values and conceptions of identity. | | | II. The Blood Quantum Method: Comparisons to American and Hawaiian Traditions | |
<
< | Federal Indian law reveals the US tradition of identifying members of indigenous groups by race. For example, US v. Rogers (an 1846 case binding on criminal cases but often referenced in civil disputes) created a two prong test for determining whether someone was Indian – first, looking for blood quantum and second, a non-racial link to tribal life. Therefore the practice of recognizing native-ness in Hawaiians only when racial ties exist is entirely consistent with American customs. | >
> | Federal Indian law reveals the US tradition of identifying members of indigenous groups by race. For example, US v. Rogers (an 1846 case binding on criminal cases but often referenced in civil disputes) created a two-prong test for determining whether someone was Indian – first, through blood quantum and second, a non-racial link to tribal life. Therefore the practice of recognizing native-ness in Hawaiians only when racial ties exist is entirely consistent with American customs. | | | | |
<
< | In contrast, Hawaiians have traditionally been unconcerned with blood quantum measurements and more affable to the notion of assimilating racial “outsiders.” Hawaiian communities were built on extended families and close friends specializing in tasks (fishing, farming, canoe building, etc) and living communally to meet everyone’s needs. This structure had a pecking order, but not based on a measurement of Hawaiian blood. Rather being a community member started with being a recognized member of a family and contributing to it. Through that relationship recognition by the broader community would flow. It seems unlikely that Hawaiians three hundred years ago would debate the “Hawaiian-ness” of a man raised on the land and taking part in the community because of the origin of his ancestors (as compared to hanai/adoption cases today). Even more difficult to conceive of is the idea that the children of Hawaiian parents would be demoted to some inferior class of Hawaiians once interracial breeding caused a descendant’s blood quantum to fall below some arbitrarily chosen level (like fifty percent in the problem with HHCA’s successor rules). | >
> | In contrast, Hawaiians have traditionally been unconcerned with blood quantum measurements and more affable to the notion of assimilating racial “outsiders.” Hawaiian communities were built on extended families and close friends specializing in tasks (fishing, farming, canoe building, etc) and living communally to meet everyone’s needs. The pecking order of this structure was not based on a measurement of Hawaiian blood. Rather, a community member meant being a recognized member of a family and contributing to that family. Through that immediate kinship relationship, recognition by the broader community would follow. It seems unlikely that three hundred years ago, Hawaiians would debate the “Hawaiian-ness” of a person raised on the land and taking part in the community because of the origin of his ancestors (as compared to hanai /adoption cases today). Even more difficult to conceive of is the idea that the children of Hawaiian parents would be demoted to some inferior class of Hawaiians once interracial breeding caused a descendant’s blood quantum to fall below some arbitrarily chosen level (like fifty percent in the case of HHCA’s successor rules). | | | | |
<
< | But today’s Hawaiian community is having these debates. Kamehameha Schools, a private institution founded at the bequest of a past Hawaiian princess, strictly adheres to racial preference when admitting students with no recognition for hanai (adopted) children of Hawaiian families. Hou Lahuiohana, a band of Hawaiians fighting for self governance rights, does so on behalf of “native Hawaiians of the blood,” meaning those at least one half racially Hawaiian, stating that those of smaller levels have lesser entitlements to Hawaiian rights. These are but two of many examples. | >
> | But today’s Hawaiian community is having these debates. Kamehameha Schools, a private institution founded at the bequest of a past Hawaiian princess, strictly adheres to racial preference when admitting students with no recognition for hanai children of Hawaiian families. Hou Lahuiohana, a band of Hawaiians fighting for self governance rights, does so on behalf of “native Hawaiians of the blood,” meaning those at least one half racially Hawaiian, and stating that those of smaller levels have lesser entitlements to Hawaiian rights. These are but two of many examples. | | | | |
<
< | The blood quantum method introduced by Americans has created a de facto standard for what it means to be Hawaiian. This standard has not simply drawn the line between whom the government will and will not assist in the name of Hawaiian revitalization, but it has bleed into the fabric of internal Hawaiian relations. Under American influence modern Hawaiians have taken up a system of recognition that seems in serious discord with the conceptions of family and community held by their ancestors. | >
> | The blood quantum method introduced by Americans has created a de facto standard for what it means to be Hawaiian. This standard has not simply drawn the line between whom the government will and will not assist in the name of Hawaiian revitalization, but it has bled into the fabric of internal Hawaiian relations. Under American influence, modern Hawaiians have taken up a system of recognition that seems in serious discord with the conceptions of family and community held by their ancestors. | | | III. Conclusion – Open Questions | |
<
< | Identification of this discordance then begs the questions: how effective have the last century’s efforts at revitalization been when at their basic level they undermine core values of the culture they seek to preserve? Is the social justice achieved for the Hawaiian community by programs using the blood quantum method (and its variances that include minimum percentage rules), outweighed by the injustice suffered by Hawaiian family members denied recognition?
These questions are impossible to answer with any quantitative data available today, but nevertheless they are critical for policy makers to consider – at both the private and governmental levels, in order for sustainable restoration of the Hawaiian community to be achieved. | >
> | Identification of this discordance then begs the question: how effective have the last century’s efforts at revitalization been when they undermine the core values of the culture they seek to preserve? For programs using the blood quantum method (and its variances that include minimum percentage rules), is the social justice achieved for the Hawaiian community outweighed by the injustice suffered by Hawaiian family members denied recognition? | | | | |
>
> | These questions are impossible to answer with any quantitative data available today, but nevertheless they are critical for policy makers to consider at both the private and governmental levels, in order for sustainable restoration of the Hawaiian community to be achieved. | | | |
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 7 - 23 May 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| |
<
< | Policing the Borders of Racially Exclusive Policies within the Kanaka Maoli Community:
The Recognition of Racially Non-Hawaiian Hanai Persons in Hawaiian Families | >
> | The Discordance Between Hawaiian Traditions and the Modern Racial Rule for Community Recognition | | | | |
<
< | The Kanaka Maoli (the indigenous people of Hawai’i) have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper looks at what those differences are and discusses (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | >
> | Background: Native Hawaiian Racial and Cultural Preservation | | | | |
<
< | I. The Hanai System: A Background & Comparison to American Adoption Practices | >
> | Over the last 150 years Native Hawaiians have struggled to survive and maintain a distinct cultural heritage under both government and social pressures to integrate into the American mainstream. In the last century, groups recognizing this struggle and responding to the need for active preservation efforts have been lead both by private community based organizations and (ironically) the government. | | | | |
>
> | The mission of these groups is generally to support and assist the Hawaiian people by identifying Native Hawaiians and providing them with some tangible benefits calculated to decrease the trend of cultural decline. Thus, one way to measure the effectiveness of these efforts is to question the process used to identify Hawaiians. Here I will discuss what the rule is for determining Native Hawaiian status, how that rule was developed, the ways in which the rule is discordant with traditional Hawaiian values, and how the overall effectiveness of revitalization efforts may be jeopardized by this discordance. | | | | |
<
< | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement of a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally, Maoli people lived communally, and an ohana (a Maoli family) includes extended members of a family and friends in the community. Accordingly, the adoption traditions differed. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage, this information is not kept hidden from them, and they will very likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | >
> | I. Recognition by Race: The Preference System & the Criteria for Native-ness | | | | |
<
< | Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and a relationship with his natural parents, instead of an experience associated with loss, abandonment, and confusion, feelings that seem to commonly result for children under western adoption practices. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs. | >
> | A. An Illustration: The HHCA | | | | |
>
> | In 1920, Congress passed the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. The Act provided for homesteads that would “revitalize the Hawaiian people.” Congress provided that a Native Hawaiian could be eligible for leases to reserved homestead lands, but only if the person could prove that they were at least one-half racially Hawaiian. Lessees could designate children as successors to their lease, but the children would also have to meet the one-half blood quantum rule. | | | | |
<
< | II. The Spirit of Ohana & Hanai Betrayed: Lack of Recognition for Trans-racial Hanai | >
> | B. The Rule Today: Blood Quantum Required | | | | |
>
> | The one-half rule outlined in the HHCA is one of the harsher blood quantum requirements by a benefit program, but it is used by a handful of organizations and illustrates the method of defining what it means to be Hawaiian by measuring some amount of Hawaiian ancestry. Today, without known exception, programs specifically aimed at providing benefits to Native Hawaiians require that a benefitee have at a minimum one documented racially Native Hawaiian ancestor. This applies both to government and privately run Hawaiian programs. | | | | |
<
< | The hanai practice described above survives today. But the reality of customs continued from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family. | >
> | C. The Effects of the Blood Quantum Rule | | | | |
<
< | The face of the Hawaiian community has changed dramatically in the last century. Hawaiians are continuing the tradition of hanai, but in highly racially-mixed communities and hanai family members now include racially-non-Hawaiian (RNH) persons and their descendants. | >
> | The problem with using the blood-quantum rule when trying to provide benefits to the entire Hawaiian community is that this form of identification precludes many persons who identify as Hawaiian. For example, adopted persons do not qualify for participation in any of these programs although their entire cultural identity may be learned from Hawaiian adoptive parents and developed through life-long participation in Hawaiian communities. To the extent that minimum blood percentages are required, children of Hawaiian parents also may be barred from access to programs depending upon the spousal choices made by their Hawaiian ancestors. | | | | |
>
> | Using the HHCA illustration, a family may develop and create roots on a piece of land for decades to have it re-possessed by the government when a parent with only adopted children passes or if a Hawaiian who chose a non-Hawaiian spouse is survived by less than 50% Hawaiian heirs. | | | | |
<
< | A. Modern Challenge: The Trans-racial Hanai Family | >
> | These are harsh ramifications affecting a large quantity of Hawaiian family members. Thus it is important to explore in what traditions this rule is grounded and how consistent it is with Hawaiian values and conceptions of identity. | | | | |
<
< | The community recognition problem that trans-racial hanai presents occurs in the following context. The Hawaiian community is responding to the need for active efforts at cultural preservation by creating programs and organizations for its own benefit. These programs and organizations generally restrict participation to those with some Hawaiian blood quantum. Generally these policies provide no language regarding the treatment of RNH- hanai family members. As a result, the adopting ohana members are able to participate in these programs, but the RNH- hanai member and his descendants are excluded. Therefore, RNH- hanai children and their descendants comprise a class of persons that are members of Hawaiian families but not allowed participation in the Hawaiian community fully compared to natural born members. (See Appendix II for an illustration of this problem recently presented in litigation.) | >
> | II. The Blood Quantum Method: Comparisons to American and Hawaiian Traditions | | | | |
>
> | Federal Indian law reveals the US tradition of identifying members of indigenous groups by race. For example, US v. Rogers (an 1846 case binding on criminal cases but often referenced in civil disputes) created a two prong test for determining whether someone was Indian – first, looking for blood quantum and second, a non-racial link to tribal life. Therefore the practice of recognizing native-ness in Hawaiians only when racial ties exist is entirely consistent with American customs. | | | | |
<
< | B. Effect: Three Nested Rings of Harm | >
> | In contrast, Hawaiians have traditionally been unconcerned with blood quantum measurements and more affable to the notion of assimilating racial “outsiders.” Hawaiian communities were built on extended families and close friends specializing in tasks (fishing, farming, canoe building, etc) and living communally to meet everyone’s needs. This structure had a pecking order, but not based on a measurement of Hawaiian blood. Rather being a community member started with being a recognized member of a family and contributing to it. Through that relationship recognition by the broader community would flow. It seems unlikely that Hawaiians three hundred years ago would debate the “Hawaiian-ness” of a man raised on the land and taking part in the community because of the origin of his ancestors (as compared to hanai/adoption cases today). Even more difficult to conceive of is the idea that the children of Hawaiian parents would be demoted to some inferior class of Hawaiians once interracial breeding caused a descendant’s blood quantum to fall below some arbitrarily chosen level (like fifty percent in the problem with HHCA’s successor rules). | | | | |
<
< | These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that traditionally has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow injury to a family member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults and causes emotional harm to the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve. | >
> | But today’s Hawaiian community is having these debates. Kamehameha Schools, a private institution founded at the bequest of a past Hawaiian princess, strictly adheres to racial preference when admitting students with no recognition for hanai (adopted) children of Hawaiian families. Hou Lahuiohana, a band of Hawaiians fighting for self governance rights, does so on behalf of “native Hawaiians of the blood,” meaning those at least one half racially Hawaiian, stating that those of smaller levels have lesser entitlements to Hawaiian rights. These are but two of many examples. | | | | |
>
> | The blood quantum method introduced by Americans has created a de facto standard for what it means to be Hawaiian. This standard has not simply drawn the line between whom the government will and will not assist in the name of Hawaiian revitalization, but it has bleed into the fabric of internal Hawaiian relations. Under American influence modern Hawaiians have taken up a system of recognition that seems in serious discord with the conceptions of family and community held by their ancestors. | | | | |
<
< | III. A Call for Change: Cultural Preservation Policies that Maintain Substantive Cultural Values | >
> | III. Conclusion – Open Questions | | | | |
>
> | Identification of this discordance then begs the questions: how effective have the last century’s efforts at revitalization been when at their basic level they undermine core values of the culture they seek to preserve? Is the social justice achieved for the Hawaiian community by programs using the blood quantum method (and its variances that include minimum percentage rules), outweighed by the injustice suffered by Hawaiian family members denied recognition? | | | | |
<
< | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subvert major customs such as the recognition of ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be disregarded. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | >
> | These questions are impossible to answer with any quantitative data available today, but nevertheless they are critical for policy makers to consider – at both the private and governmental levels, in order for sustainable restoration of the Hawaiian community to be achieved. | | | | |
<
< |
Appendix I: Illustration of RNH-Hanai Exclusion
Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for RNH-hanai persons has been instituted.
- The word "injunctory" didn't exist. You wanted in fact to say "interim," rather than "injunctive."
| | | | |
<
< |
- I think the awkwardness of this analysis, Makalika, is that it begins from the assumption that there's a general problem in the treatment of traditional family-definition law, when in fact your data show that there's a problem in the administration of the local racial preference system. Without the preference system, there's no demonstrated incompatibility between traditional family definition and contemporary family law. The preference system's concern with distinguishing "native" from "non-native" may conflict with traditional understandings of "us" in many ways, of which some are more difficult to deal with than others. Analysis of that question would be as economical as your current mode of investigation, wasting no concepts or attention on irrelevant matters, and it needn't be ideological either for or against preference in order to provide a more straightforward and useful set of insights than what you can get with the present conceptual machinery.
| | |
\ No newline at end of file |
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 6 - 09 May 2008 - Main.EbenMoglen
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| |
<
< | DRAFT READY FOR REVIEW | | |
Policing the Borders of Racially Exclusive Policies within the Kanaka Maoli Community:
The Recognition of Racially Non-Hawaiian Hanai Persons in Hawaiian Families | | | I. The Hanai System: A Background & Comparison to American Adoption Practices
| |
<
< | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement of a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally, Maoli people lived communally, and an ohana (a Maoli family) includes extended members of a family and friends in the community. Accordingly, the adoption traditions differed. _Hanai_ describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage, this information is not kept hidden from them, and they will very likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | >
> | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement of a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally, Maoli people lived communally, and an ohana (a Maoli family) includes extended members of a family and friends in the community. Accordingly, the adoption traditions differed. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage, this information is not kept hidden from them, and they will very likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | | |
Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and a relationship with his natural parents, instead of an experience associated with loss, abandonment, and confusion, feelings that seem to commonly result for children under western adoption practices. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs.
| | | Appendix I: Illustration of RNH-Hanai Exclusion | |
<
< | Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for RNH-hanai persons has been instituted. | >
> | Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for RNH-hanai persons has been instituted.
- The word "injunctory" didn't exist. You wanted in fact to say "interim," rather than "injunctive."
| | | | |
>
> |
- I think the awkwardness of this analysis, Makalika, is that it begins from the assumption that there's a general problem in the treatment of traditional family-definition law, when in fact your data show that there's a problem in the administration of the local racial preference system. Without the preference system, there's no demonstrated incompatibility between traditional family definition and contemporary family law. The preference system's concern with distinguishing "native" from "non-native" may conflict with traditional understandings of "us" in many ways, of which some are more difficult to deal with than others. Analysis of that question would be as economical as your current mode of investigation, wasting no concepts or attention on irrelevant matters, and it needn't be ideological either for or against preference in order to provide a more straightforward and useful set of insights than what you can get with the present conceptual machinery.
| | | |
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 5 - 20 Apr 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | Policing the Borders of Racially Exclusive Policies within the Kanaka Maoli Community:
The Recognition of Racially Non-Hawaiian Hanai Persons in Hawaiian Families | |
<
< | The indigenous people of Hawai’i, the Kanaka Maoli, have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper looks at what those differences are in order to explore (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | >
> | The Kanaka Maoli (the indigenous people of Hawai’i) have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper looks at what those differences are and discusses (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | | | | |
<
< | I. The Spirit of Hanai, and the Difference Between “Hanai” & “Adoption” | >
> | I. The Hanai System: A Background & Comparison to American Adoption Practices | | | | |
<
< | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement from a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally Maoli people lived communally and their conception of family and adoption differed. A person’s family, their ohana, goes beyond the parent-child relationship to include what most Americans would consider far distant relatives (i.e. 13th or 14th cousins) and close friends in the community. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage and will likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | >
> | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement of a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally, Maoli people lived communally, and an ohana (a Maoli family) includes extended members of a family and friends in the community. Accordingly, the adoption traditions differed. _Hanai_ describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage, this information is not kept hidden from them, and they will very likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | | | | |
<
< | Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and natural parents, instead of a perception of loss expressed in western adoption practice. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs. | >
> | Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and a relationship with his natural parents, instead of an experience associated with loss, abandonment, and confusion, feelings that seem to commonly result for children under western adoption practices. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs. | | | | |
<
< | II. The Spirit of Ohana & Hanai Betrayed | >
> | II. The Spirit of Ohana & Hanai Betrayed: Lack of Recognition for Trans-racial Hanai | | |
The hanai practice described above survives today. But the reality of customs continued from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family. | | | A. Modern Challenge: The Trans-racial Hanai Family | |
<
< | The formal community recognition problem that trans-racial hanai presents occurs in the following context. The Hawaiian community is responding to the need for active efforts at cultural preservation by creating programs and organizations for its own benefit. These programs and organizations generally restrict participation to those with some Hawaiian blood quantum. Generally these policies provide no language regarding the treatment of RNH-_hanai_ family members. As a result, the adopting ohana members are able to participate in these programs, but the RNH- hanai member and his descendants are excluded. Therefore, RNH- hanai children and their descendants comprise a class of persons that are members of Hawaiian families but not allowed participation in the Hawaiian community fully compared to natural born members. (See Appendix II for an illustration of this problem recently presented in litigation.) | >
> | The community recognition problem that trans-racial hanai presents occurs in the following context. The Hawaiian community is responding to the need for active efforts at cultural preservation by creating programs and organizations for its own benefit. These programs and organizations generally restrict participation to those with some Hawaiian blood quantum. Generally these policies provide no language regarding the treatment of RNH-_hanai_ family members. As a result, the adopting ohana members are able to participate in these programs, but the RNH- hanai member and his descendants are excluded. Therefore, RNH- hanai children and their descendants comprise a class of persons that are members of Hawaiian families but not allowed participation in the Hawaiian community fully compared to natural born members. (See Appendix II for an illustration of this problem recently presented in litigation.) | | |
B. Effect: Three Nested Rings of Harm | |
<
< |
These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that traditionally has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow assault – physically, socially, politically – on a member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults and causes emotional harm to the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve. | >
> | These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that traditionally has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow injury to a family member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults and causes emotional harm to the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve. | | |
III. A Call for Change: Cultural Preservation Policies that Maintain Substantive Cultural Values | |
<
< | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subvert major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be disregarded. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | >
> | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subvert major customs such as the recognition of ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be disregarded. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | | |
| |
<
< | Appendix I: English to Hawaiian Glossary
Kanaka Maoli, Maoli: Native Hawaiians (pronounced similarly as the Maori, the related indigenous peoples of New Zealand)
hanai: term referring to adoption. Examples: I am hanai. = I am adopted. / This is my hanai mother = This is my mother by adoption.
ohana: family, for Hawaiians normally more expansive scope than in Anglo culture, goes beyond immediate family to include all extended relatives.
Appendix II: Illustration of RNH-Hanai Exclusion | >
> | Appendix I: Illustration of RNH-Hanai Exclusion | | |
Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for RNH-hanai persons has been instituted. |
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 4 - 13 Apr 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | The hanai practice described above survives today. But the reality of customs continued from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family.
| |
<
< | The face of the Hawaiian community has changed dramatically in the last century. Hawaiians are continuing the tradition of hanai, but in the highly racially-mixed communities and hanai family members now include racially-non-Hawaiian (RNH) persons and their descendants. | >
> | The face of the Hawaiian community has changed dramatically in the last century. Hawaiians are continuing the tradition of hanai, but in highly racially-mixed communities and hanai family members now include racially-non-Hawaiian (RNH) persons and their descendants. | | |
A. Modern Challenge: The Trans-racial Hanai Family | | | B. Effect: Three Nested Rings of Harm
| |
<
< | These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow assault – physically, socially, politically – on a member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve. | >
> | These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that traditionally has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow assault – physically, socially, politically – on a member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults and causes emotional harm to the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve. | | |
III. A Call for Change: Cultural Preservation Policies that Maintain Substantive Cultural Values | |
<
< | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subverting major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be overturned. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | >
> | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subvert major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be disregarded. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | | | | | | | |
<
< | Appendix II: Illustration of NRH-Hanai Exclusion | >
> | Appendix II: Illustration of RNH-Hanai Exclusion | | | | |
<
< | Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for NRH-hanai persons has been instituted. | >
> | Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for RNH-hanai persons has been instituted. | | |
|
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 3 - 05 Apr 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | Policing the Borders of Racially Exclusive Policies within the Kanaka Maoli Community:
The Recognition of Racially Non-Hawaiian Hanai Persons in Hawaiian Families | |
<
< | The indigenous people of Hawai’i, the Kanaka Maoli, have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper will explain what those differences are in order to explore (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed in within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | >
> | The indigenous people of Hawai’i, the Kanaka Maoli, have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper looks at what those differences are in order to explore (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | | | I. The Spirit of Hanai, and the Difference Between “Hanai” & “Adoption”
| |
<
< | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement from a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. The traditional Maoli people lived communally and their conceptions of family and adoption differs. A person’s family, their ohana, goes beyond the parent-child relationship to include what Americans would consider far distant relatives (i.e. 13th or 14th cousins) and close friends in the community. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage and will likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and similar in substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | >
> | The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement from a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. Traditionally Maoli people lived communally and their conception of family and adoption differed. A person’s family, their ohana, goes beyond the parent-child relationship to include what most Americans would consider far distant relatives (i.e. 13th or 14th cousins) and close friends in the community. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage and will likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children. | | |
Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and natural parents, instead of a perception of loss expressed in western adoption practice. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs.
| | | II. The Spirit of Ohana & Hanai Betrayed | |
<
< | The hanai practice described above still survives. But the reality of customs from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not notably arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family. | >
> | The hanai practice described above survives today. But the reality of customs continued from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family. | | |
The face of the Hawaiian community has changed dramatically in the last century. Hawaiians are continuing the tradition of hanai, but in the highly racially-mixed communities and hanai family members now include racially-non-Hawaiian (RNH) persons and their descendants. | | | III. A Call for Change: Cultural Preservation Policies that Maintain Substantive Cultural Values | |
<
< | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies that strive for cultural preservation without substantively subverting major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be overturned. Policy makers must look to these values and allow them to inform rules pertaining to recognition of community members. Efforts like these would point to the importance of recognition of our hanai family, without regard to their biological race, and would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | >
> | The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies for RNH-hanai family members. As the Hawaiian community strives to prevent cultural extinction it must take care not to subverting major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be overturned. Efforts to preserve these values, to reaffirm the importance of recognition of our hanai family, whatever their biological race, would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above. | | |
| |
<
< | Appendix I: English to Hawaiian Dictionary | >
> | Appendix I: English to Hawaiian Glossary | | |
Kanaka Maoli, Maoli: Native Hawaiians (pronounced similarly as the Maori, the related indigenous peoples of New Zealand) |
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 2 - 04 Apr 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| |
<
< | | >
> | | | | -- MakalikaNaholowaa - 01 Apr 2008 | |
<
< |
---+ Discordance in Native Hawaiian Law: Recognition of Adopted Children
| >
> | DRAFT READY FOR REVIEW
Policing the Borders of Racially Exclusive Policies within the Kanaka Maoli Community:
The Recognition of Racially Non-Hawaiian Hanai Persons in Hawaiian Families | | | | |
<
< | A Definition of Hanai: Hanai is the kanaka maoli word for
adoption. Under traditional hanai practices:
Ω No stigma attached to being adopted/hanai, no sense of
inferior position within family due to hanai under this system
Ω Normally conducted within the family, but if that was not
possible then with some other family in the community.
Ω Differs from American adoption in that surviving biological
children were still granted access to their hanai child and
the hanai child was always aware of his biological birth
roots.
Ω However, Children recognized as a part of the ohana they were
hanai into, hanai family took full and permanent
responsibility for their care.
Ω Also noteworthy: Hawaiian families lived communally and with
extended members - the responsibility of a hanai child, like
natural born children, was not only an undertaking by the
parents primarily providing their care, but they are
recognized as a member of the larger extended ohana and
accepted by this wider community.
B Issue: The hanai tradition survives from Ancient Hawaiian
tradition and was developed during a time when the Maoli were a
racially homogenous community. References to how hanai children
were recognized (as full members of the family without lessened
community recognition) take place at a time when recognition
questions involving transracial hanai did not significantly
arise. Result is that although we know the spirit of hanai to
be one of full inclusion of our hanai keiki into the ohana, no
record squarely addresses how a racially non-Hawaiian child
adopted into a racially Hawaiian family should be recognized by
the general Native Hawaiian community. However the question has
come up in modern times due to the rise in transracial adoption,
and various Native Hawaiian organizations have decided to deny
recognition, taking up a policy of strict exclusion without blood
quantum. By analyzing the results of the current policy by
significant Maoli organizations, its my opinion that
Ω 1. the decision not to recognize racially non-Hawaiian (RNH)
hanai persons as full members of the Maoli community is wrong
in light of the spirit of hawaiian hanai custom and
traditional Maoli ohana values.
Ω 2. And, the policy as it stands is so damaging to the
individual RNH-hanai person, hanai ohana, and Maoli community
as a whole that it can not stand and must be changed to allow
for full participation in the community, and potentially in
the self governing political body, of Maoli people to the
same extent that their natural born brothers and sisters
would.
C Problem Statement: something that was not faced by traditional
hanai parents , but a reality today in light of the significant
upset of Native Hawaiian life over the last 100 years, is:
Ω 1. the Native Hawaiian community is responding to the need
for cultural self preservation by creating and maintaining
programs and organizations for its own benefit
≈ Kamehameha School: a premier private K-12 school that
provides not only standard education courses but
education on native hawaiian language and culture.
≈ Kau Inoa: an organization that seeks to create an
organization for Maoli self governance
≈ Various Halaus: social clubs usually named in honor of an
ali'i
Ω 2. these programs and organizations generally restrict
participation to those with some Native Hawaiian blood
quantum
Ω 3. the hanai parents/family are able to participate in these
programs
Ω 4. the hanai keiki and his/her descendants are not granted
entrance because no exception is made to recognize adopted
persons similarly to natural born ohana members
Ω 5. as a result hanai children and their descendants comprise
a class of persons that are members of Native Hawaiian
families per both Western conception (via adoption) and
Native Hawaiian custom/tradition/law (via hanai) but not
allowed participation in the Native Hawaiian community fully
as natural born members could.
D Illustration of Problem: Monica-Cummings v. Kamehameha Schools
Ω Brayton sought admission to Kamehameha Schools, a highly
competitive private school that gives preferential admissions
status to applicants with Native Hawaiian ancestry in order
to meet the school's goals of preserving Native Hawaiian
culture and being a resource to aid the Native Hawaiian
people. Brayton is the son of a RNH hanai woman, raised and
legally adopted by a Native Hawaiian father, and is therefore
a member of a Native Hawaiian family. When the school
realized that his Native Hawaiian family status was created
by hanai, they upheld their plain meaning, literal
interpretation of the criteria requiring ancestry and
rescinded his admission to the school.
E What Harm Is Caused: This is a harm for
Ω The hanai ohana that is injured by a community that will not
give full recognition to the child
Ω The hanai keiki that culturally identifies with the Maoli
community but is not allowed to participate fully within it
Ω The Maoli community as a whole is harmed because
≈ 1. the weakening of cultural values related to hanai and
the ohana, such as the open and full acceptance of family
members and encouragement of adoption, is a sign of
cultural decline. It makes no sense to exclude people in
an effort to preserve a culture when by virtue of
excluding you undermine a cornerstone value of the
culture.
≈ 2. the preservation of the culture is possible through
participation by members nurtured by the community, who
understand the values of the culture in a meaningful way
that those foreign to the group can not. Alienating
members with such cultural and familial ties is a loss of
valuable membership for the community.
F Why This Is Wrong:
Ω This effectively creates an inferior class of family members.
To borrow a metaphor from property law, the NRH-hanai member
has fewer sticks in his bundle when it comes to his right to
participate in the Native Hawaiian community. He gets the
right to the same upbringing as his racially Hawaiian
brothers and sisters, but may not be admitted to the school
his siblings attend. He may be taught to identify with
Native Hawaiian values and way of life by his hanai family,
but he may not participate in some Hawaiian organizations to
help preserve his culture and the culture of his ohana.
Ω Hawaiian Family Values oppose this concept of devaluing a
family member due to hanai. As outlined above, hanai is
encouraged in Hawaiian culture. It is a demonstration of the
love and care that hawaiians have for their ohana and their
extended community ohana to make sure that every child have a
loving home. This tradition that encourages us to love and
raise a child fully and permanently, as we would a natural
born child, does not encourage us to exclude him later, treat
him as a haole, an outsider.
Ω It is understandable for Native Hawaiians, like any
indigenous people struggling for cultural survival, to be
weary of persons without racial links when considering
admittance to programs or organizations designed to benefit
only community members. Concerns over truly shared interests
without a racial link to the group are common and arguably
well grounded. But adopted persons are the exception to the
rule. In Native Hawaiian families, to exclude these persons,
to maintain vigilance against the threat of infiltration by
foreigners, at the expense of sacrificing valued hanai family
members in discordance with traditional Hawaiian family
values is wrong, harmful, and should not continue.
G Why This Is A Legal Problem: Since the demise of the Kingdom of
Hawaii, Native Hawaiians have no self governance structure, and
therefore the question of how to treat RNH-hanai is not
technically a legal question but one being answered in the
context of private organizations aligned with the interest of a
racial people. However, there are multiple organizations within
the Native Hawaiian community working to achieve self governance
(again reference Kau Inoa). Should that goal be reached (and
lets assume that that is possible within my lifetime), Native
Hawaiians will presumably rebuild their legal system. Then the
question of how to recognize NRH-hanai family members will become
not only one of social science, but again an issue in Native
Hawaiian law. At that time, it is likely that the interpretation
of how to treat NRH persons under the hanai system used today
will be adopted or at least heavily considered in deciding this
question in a formal law-making context. Therefore it is
imperative that this question be treated by the Native Hawaiian
community today with rigorous attention to its support in
Hawaiian tradition and with consideration to both public policy
concerns and of the long term negative, prejudicial effects it
will have on the Maoli families involved. By doing so, as
discussed above, it is clear that NRH-Hanai persons should be
granted the same recognition and rights of participation in the
Native Hawaiian community as natural born Maoli people.
- 2 Hawaiian to English Dictionary
A Kanaka Maoli, Maoli: Native Hawaiians (pronounced similarly as
the Maori, the related indigenous peoples of New Zealand)
B hanai: term referring to adoption. Examples: I am hanai. = I
am adopted. / This is my hanai mother = This is my mother by
adoption.
C keiki: child. Example: She is my hanai keiki. = She is my
adopted child.
D ohana: family.
E halau: school or group. Normally when someone says they are a
part of a halau, they are referring either to a hula school or
social club.
F ali'i: royalty, descendents of Wakea, a diety of Ancient Hawaii.
G haole: outsider, foreigner. Today most commonly used to refer
to a white person.
- 3 Links to Sources
A Explanation of what Hanai means:
Ω www.uhh.hawaii.edu—writing.php
<http://www.uhh.hawaii.edu/academics/hohonu/writing.php?id=28> | | | | |
>
> | The indigenous people of Hawai’i, the Kanaka Maoli, have traditions for handling adoption called hanai. Hanai practices are not unique compared to other Polynesian peoples, but they significantly differ from traditional adoption practices in other parts of the United States. This paper will explain what those differences are in order to explore (i) how the substance of the hanai practice is being betrayed in within the modern Hawaiian community, (ii) what harmful effects this betrayal has for the family concerned and the group as a whole, and (iii) how these harms should be corrected by addressing the discordance between current community recognition policies and traditional cultural values concerning family and hanai family members. | | | | |
>
> | I. The Spirit of Hanai, and the Difference Between “Hanai” & “Adoption” | | | | |
<
< | | | | \ No newline at end of file | |
>
> |
The common conception of a family entity in the United States is the nuclear family, and the term adoption refers to the movement from a child permanently and completely from its natural nuclear family to the adoptive one. The traditional Maoli people lived communally and their conceptions of family and adoption differs. A person’s family, their ohana, goes beyond the parent-child relationship to include what Americans would consider far distant relatives (i.e. 13th or 14th cousins) and close friends in the community. Hanai describes the permanent movement of a child’s primary care giving from the natural parents to someone usually within their ohana, although not necessarily a biological relative. The hanai child is always aware of its natural parentage and will likely have a relationship with the natural parents. However the hanai relationship between child and adoptive parents is equal in recognition and similar in substance to that of the adoptive parent’s natural children.
Hanai is common and not considered emotionally traumatizing for a child. The hanai system and extended ohana structure create an environment in which a hanai child has the benefit of his hanai parents and natural parents, instead of a perception of loss expressed in western adoption practice. There is no stigma connected to being hanai within Maoli families. There is also no tradition of lessened recognition of a family member due to a hanai, versus a biological, connection. Hanai compared to natural children are equally loved, committed to permanently for care giving, and recognized as heirs.
II. The Spirit of Ohana & Hanai Betrayed
The hanai practice described above still survives. But the reality of customs from ancient Maoli traditions is that their development occurred during a time when the Maoli were a racially homogeneous community. Descriptions of how hanai children were recognized, as full members of the family without lessened community recognition, come from a time when recognition questions involving trans-racial hanai did not notably arise. Thus, no custom squarely addresses how the general Hawaiian community has or should recognize a racially non-Hawaiian child that is hanai into a racially Hawaiian family.
The face of the Hawaiian community has changed dramatically in the last century. Hawaiians are continuing the tradition of hanai, but in the highly racially-mixed communities and hanai family members now include racially-non-Hawaiian (RNH) persons and their descendants.
A. Modern Challenge: The Trans-racial Hanai Family
The formal community recognition problem that trans-racial hanai presents occurs in the following context. The Hawaiian community is responding to the need for active efforts at cultural preservation by creating programs and organizations for its own benefit. These programs and organizations generally restrict participation to those with some Hawaiian blood quantum. Generally these policies provide no language regarding the treatment of RNH-_hanai_ family members. As a result, the adopting ohana members are able to participate in these programs, but the RNH- hanai member and his descendants are excluded. Therefore, RNH- hanai children and their descendants comprise a class of persons that are members of Hawaiian families but not allowed participation in the Hawaiian community fully compared to natural born members. (See Appendix II for an illustration of this problem recently presented in litigation.)
B. Effect: Three Nested Rings of Harm
These exclusionary RNH- hanai practices are causing harm on three fronts. First, the hanai person suffers by not being granted the same rights to participation in the community that his hanai family members would by virtue of his hanai status – a status that has deliberately avoided diminished recognition within the family or community. Second, it is important to realize that the Hawaiian family as a whole is associatively injured. The ohana concept does not allow assault – physically, socially, politically – on a member to remain localized. The community that calls into question the legitimacy of a hanai child harms not just the child but insults the entire family unit. Third, the Hawaiian community as a whole is harmed. The community is allowing race to nullify the opportunity for meaningful community contribution by a child of a community family. The community is also creating unnecessary exceptions to recognition traditions of Hawaiian family members and treatment of hanai persons which degrades the culture that the policy aims to preserve.
III. A Call for Change: Cultural Preservation Policies that Maintain Substantive Cultural Values
The harm that these exclusionary policies cause is so pervasive within the Hawaiian community that they must be changed. Community leaders must look to traditional Maoli goals of customs and practices to inform the development of new policies that strive for cultural preservation without substantively subverting major customs such as the recognition for ohana members in a community and the status of hanai members in an ohana. These cultural cornerstones should not be overturned. Policy makers must look to these values and allow them to inform rules pertaining to recognition of community members. Efforts like these would point to the importance of recognition of our hanai family, without regard to their biological race, and would have the effect of correcting the discordance between cultural values and modern recognition rules while also preventing the multifarious harms described above.
Appendix I: English to Hawaiian Dictionary
Kanaka Maoli, Maoli: Native Hawaiians (pronounced similarly as the Maori, the related indigenous peoples of New Zealand)
hanai: term referring to adoption. Examples: I am hanai. = I am adopted. / This is my hanai mother = This is my mother by adoption.
ohana: family, for Hawaiians normally more expansive scope than in Anglo culture, goes beyond immediate family to include all extended relatives.
Appendix II: Illustration of NRH-Hanai Exclusion
Mohica-Cummings v. Kamehameha School illustrates this problem well. Kamehameha School is a prestigious K-12 private school providing services that include difficult to obtain Hawaiian cultural and language education courses. Their admission’s policy is racially preferential and it is effectively completely exclusive to persons with a Hawaiian ancestor. There is no language in their policy speaking to RNH-hanai children and the current interpretation denies admissions preference to this group. Braydon Mohica-Cummings is the son of a RNH-hanai woman. He was admitted to Kamehameha School, but his admission to the school was rescinded when it was discovered that his Hawaiian familial status was through his hanai grandfather, a Native Hawaiian man. After a court provided injunctory relief allowing Braydon to attend school while the suit challenging the lawfulness of Kamehameha’s racially preferential policies was in progress, the school settled the case with the family. The settlement included an agreement to allow Braydon an exception to their ancestor requirement, but no general exception for NRH-hanai persons has been instituted.
|
|
|
MakalikaNaholowaa-SecondPaper 1 - 01 Apr 2008 - Main.MakalikaNaholowaa
|
|
>
> |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
-- MakalikaNaholowaa - 01 Apr 2008
---+ Discordance in Native Hawaiian Law: Recognition of Adopted Children
A Definition of Hanai: Hanai is the kanaka maoli word for
adoption. Under traditional hanai practices:
Ω No stigma attached to being adopted/hanai, no sense of
inferior position within family due to hanai under this system
Ω Normally conducted within the family, but if that was not
possible then with some other family in the community.
Ω Differs from American adoption in that surviving biological
children were still granted access to their hanai child and
the hanai child was always aware of his biological birth
roots.
Ω However, Children recognized as a part of the ohana they were
hanai into, hanai family took full and permanent
responsibility for their care.
Ω Also noteworthy: Hawaiian families lived communally and with
extended members - the responsibility of a hanai child, like
natural born children, was not only an undertaking by the
parents primarily providing their care, but they are
recognized as a member of the larger extended ohana and
accepted by this wider community.
B Issue: The hanai tradition survives from Ancient Hawaiian
tradition and was developed during a time when the Maoli were a
racially homogenous community. References to how hanai children
were recognized (as full members of the family without lessened
community recognition) take place at a time when recognition
questions involving transracial hanai did not significantly
arise. Result is that although we know the spirit of hanai to
be one of full inclusion of our hanai keiki into the ohana, no
record squarely addresses how a racially non-Hawaiian child
adopted into a racially Hawaiian family should be recognized by
the general Native Hawaiian community. However the question has
come up in modern times due to the rise in transracial adoption,
and various Native Hawaiian organizations have decided to deny
recognition, taking up a policy of strict exclusion without blood
quantum. By analyzing the results of the current policy by
significant Maoli organizations, its my opinion that
Ω 1. the decision not to recognize racially non-Hawaiian (RNH)
hanai persons as full members of the Maoli community is wrong
in light of the spirit of hawaiian hanai custom and
traditional Maoli ohana values.
Ω 2. And, the policy as it stands is so damaging to the
individual RNH-hanai person, hanai ohana, and Maoli community
as a whole that it can not stand and must be changed to allow
for full participation in the community, and potentially in
the self governing political body, of Maoli people to the
same extent that their natural born brothers and sisters
would.
C Problem Statement: something that was not faced by traditional
hanai parents , but a reality today in light of the significant
upset of Native Hawaiian life over the last 100 years, is:
Ω 1. the Native Hawaiian community is responding to the need
for cultural self preservation by creating and maintaining
programs and organizations for its own benefit
≈ Kamehameha School: a premier private K-12 school that
provides not only standard education courses but
education on native hawaiian language and culture.
≈ Kau Inoa: an organization that seeks to create an
organization for Maoli self governance
≈ Various Halaus: social clubs usually named in honor of an
ali'i
Ω 2. these programs and organizations generally restrict
participation to those with some Native Hawaiian blood
quantum
Ω 3. the hanai parents/family are able to participate in these
programs
Ω 4. the hanai keiki and his/her descendants are not granted
entrance because no exception is made to recognize adopted
persons similarly to natural born ohana members
Ω 5. as a result hanai children and their descendants comprise
a class of persons that are members of Native Hawaiian
families per both Western conception (via adoption) and
Native Hawaiian custom/tradition/law (via hanai) but not
allowed participation in the Native Hawaiian community fully
as natural born members could.
D Illustration of Problem: Monica-Cummings v. Kamehameha Schools
Ω Brayton sought admission to Kamehameha Schools, a highly
competitive private school that gives preferential admissions
status to applicants with Native Hawaiian ancestry in order
to meet the school's goals of preserving Native Hawaiian
culture and being a resource to aid the Native Hawaiian
people. Brayton is the son of a RNH hanai woman, raised and
legally adopted by a Native Hawaiian father, and is therefore
a member of a Native Hawaiian family. When the school
realized that his Native Hawaiian family status was created
by hanai, they upheld their plain meaning, literal
interpretation of the criteria requiring ancestry and
rescinded his admission to the school.
E What Harm Is Caused: This is a harm for
Ω The hanai ohana that is injured by a community that will not
give full recognition to the child
Ω The hanai keiki that culturally identifies with the Maoli
community but is not allowed to participate fully within it
Ω The Maoli community as a whole is harmed because
≈ 1. the weakening of cultural values related to hanai and
the ohana, such as the open and full acceptance of family
members and encouragement of adoption, is a sign of
cultural decline. It makes no sense to exclude people in
an effort to preserve a culture when by virtue of
excluding you undermine a cornerstone value of the
culture.
≈ 2. the preservation of the culture is possible through
participation by members nurtured by the community, who
understand the values of the culture in a meaningful way
that those foreign to the group can not. Alienating
members with such cultural and familial ties is a loss of
valuable membership for the community.
F Why This Is Wrong:
Ω This effectively creates an inferior class of family members.
To borrow a metaphor from property law, the NRH-hanai member
has fewer sticks in his bundle when it comes to his right to
participate in the Native Hawaiian community. He gets the
right to the same upbringing as his racially Hawaiian
brothers and sisters, but may not be admitted to the school
his siblings attend. He may be taught to identify with
Native Hawaiian values and way of life by his hanai family,
but he may not participate in some Hawaiian organizations to
help preserve his culture and the culture of his ohana.
Ω Hawaiian Family Values oppose this concept of devaluing a
family member due to hanai. As outlined above, hanai is
encouraged in Hawaiian culture. It is a demonstration of the
love and care that hawaiians have for their ohana and their
extended community ohana to make sure that every child have a
loving home. This tradition that encourages us to love and
raise a child fully and permanently, as we would a natural
born child, does not encourage us to exclude him later, treat
him as a haole, an outsider.
Ω It is understandable for Native Hawaiians, like any
indigenous people struggling for cultural survival, to be
weary of persons without racial links when considering
admittance to programs or organizations designed to benefit
only community members. Concerns over truly shared interests
without a racial link to the group are common and arguably
well grounded. But adopted persons are the exception to the
rule. In Native Hawaiian families, to exclude these persons,
to maintain vigilance against the threat of infiltration by
foreigners, at the expense of sacrificing valued hanai family
members in discordance with traditional Hawaiian family
values is wrong, harmful, and should not continue.
G Why This Is A Legal Problem: Since the demise of the Kingdom of
Hawaii, Native Hawaiians have no self governance structure, and
therefore the question of how to treat RNH-hanai is not
technically a legal question but one being answered in the
context of private organizations aligned with the interest of a
racial people. However, there are multiple organizations within
the Native Hawaiian community working to achieve self governance
(again reference Kau Inoa). Should that goal be reached (and
lets assume that that is possible within my lifetime), Native
Hawaiians will presumably rebuild their legal system. Then the
question of how to recognize NRH-hanai family members will become
not only one of social science, but again an issue in Native
Hawaiian law. At that time, it is likely that the interpretation
of how to treat NRH persons under the hanai system used today
will be adopted or at least heavily considered in deciding this
question in a formal law-making context. Therefore it is
imperative that this question be treated by the Native Hawaiian
community today with rigorous attention to its support in
Hawaiian tradition and with consideration to both public policy
concerns and of the long term negative, prejudicial effects it
will have on the Maoli families involved. By doing so, as
discussed above, it is clear that NRH-Hanai persons should be
granted the same recognition and rights of participation in the
Native Hawaiian community as natural born Maoli people.
- 2 Hawaiian to English Dictionary
A Kanaka Maoli, Maoli: Native Hawaiians (pronounced similarly as
the Maori, the related indigenous peoples of New Zealand)
B hanai: term referring to adoption. Examples: I am hanai. = I
am adopted. / This is my hanai mother = This is my mother by
adoption.
C keiki: child. Example: She is my hanai keiki. = She is my
adopted child.
D ohana: family.
E halau: school or group. Normally when someone says they are a
part of a halau, they are referring either to a hula school or
social club.
F ali'i: royalty, descendents of Wakea, a diety of Ancient Hawaii.
G haole: outsider, foreigner. Today most commonly used to refer
to a white person.
- 3 Links to Sources
A Explanation of what Hanai means:
Ω www.uhh.hawaii.edu—writing.php
|
|
|