No abstract

The purpose of this article is to introduce the Family Resilience Inventory (FRI) and present findings on initial efforts to validate this measure. The FRI is designed to assess family resilience in one's current family and in one's family of origin, enabling the assessment of family protective factors across these generations. The development of the FRI was the result of many years of ethnographic research with Southeastern Native American tribes; yet, we believe that this scale is applicable to families of various backgrounds. Items for the FRI were derived directly from thematic analysis of qualitative data with 436 participants, resulting in two 20-item scales. Due to missing data, eight cases were removed from the 127 participants across two tribes, resulting in an analytic sample size of 119. Conceptually, the FRI is comprised of two factors or scales measuring distinct dimensions of family resilience (i.e., resilience in one's current family and resilience in one's family of origin). The results of the confirmatory factor analysis supported the hypothesized two-factor structure (X 2 (644) = 814.14, p = .03, X 2 /df = 1.10, RMSEA = .03, CFI = .97, TLI = .96). Both the subscales and the total FRI scale (a = .92) demonstrated excellent reliability. The results also provided preliminary evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. This measure fills a gap in the absence of community-based, culturally grounded, and empirical measures of family resilience. The examination of family resilience, which may occur across generations, is an exciting new contribution of the FRI.

(1) Background: Settler colonialism has severely disrupted Indigenous ancestral ways of healing and being, contributing to an onslaught of health disparities. In particular, the United Houma Nation (UHN) has faced large land loss and trauma, dispossession, and marginalization. Given the paucity of research addressing health for Indigenous individuals living in Louisiana, this study sought to co-identify a United Houma Nation health framework, by co-developing a community land-based healing approach in order to inform future community-based health prevention programs. (2) Methods: This pilot tested co-designed and implemented a land-based healing pilot study among Houma women utilizing a health promotion leadership approach and utilized semi-structured interviews among to identify a UHN health framework to guide future results. (3) Results: The findings indicated that RTOR was a feasible pilot project. The initial themes were (1.) place, (2.) environmental/land trauma, (3.) ancestors, (4.) spirituality/mindfulness, (5.) cultural continuity, and (6.) environment and health. The reconnection to land was deemed feasible and seen as central to renewing relationships with ancestors (aihalia asanochi taha), others, and body. This mindful, re-engagement with the land contributed to subthemes of developing stronger tribal identities, recreating ceremonies, and increased cultural continuity, and transforming narratives of trauma into hope and resilience. Based on these findings a Houma Health (Uma Hochokma) Framework was developed and presented. (4) Conclusions: Overall, this study found that land can serve as a feasible therapeutic site for healing through reconnecting Houma tribal citizens to both ancestral knowledges and stories of resilience, as well as viewing self as part of a larger collective. These findings also imply that revisiting historically traumatic places encouraged renewed commitment to cultural continuity and health behaviors—particularly when these places are approached relationally, with ceremony, and traumatic events tied to these places, including climate change and environmental/land trauma, are acknowledged along with the love the ancestors held for future generations.

Indigenous peoples of the United States are distinct from other ethnic minorities because they have experienced colonization as the original inhabitants. Social and health disparities are connected to a context of historical oppression—the chronic, pervasive, and intergenerational experiences of oppression that, over time, may be normalized, imposed, and internalized into the daily lives of many Indigenous peoples (including individuals, families, and communities). As part of the critical Framework of Historical Oppression, Resilience, and Transcendence (FHORT), in this article, we introduce the Historical Oppression Scale (HOS), a scale assessing internalized and externalized oppression. Our study reports on survey data ( N = 127) from a larger convergent mixed-methodology study with scale items derived from thematic analysis of qualitative data ( N = 436), which informed the resultant 10-item scale. After six cases were removed from the 127 participants who participated in the quantitative component to the study due to missing data across two tribes, the sample size for analysis was 121. Confirmatory factor analysis testing of the hypothesized unidimensional construct indicated acceptable model fit ( X2 = 58.10, [Formula: see text] 1.94, CFI = .98, TLI = .97, RMSEA = .088, 90% CI = .05, .12). Reliability of the 10-item scale was excellent (α = .97) and convergent and discriminant validity were established. The HOS explicates complex associations between historical oppression and health and social disparities and may be an important clinical and research tool in an understudied area.

No abstract

Environmental changes are projected to have adverse impacts on marginalized populations through additional pressures placed on already struggling social systems. Indigenous communities, given their attachment to and dependence on the land, are especially vulnerable. Though indigenous peoples throughout the world contribute the least to changes in the environment, they are disproportionally affected. To date, there has been limited research on health impacts resulting from environmental changes, especially among indigenous peoples in the United States. This chapter presents a case study on how environmental change exposure (e.g., observations, frequency, threats) and indigenous-specific sensitivities (e.g., historical trauma, ethnic identity, discrimination) affect the likelihood of participation in adaptation activities by indigenous peoples living in a physically vulnerable coastal area of the United States. It connects these findings with themes arising within other indigenous communities experiencing environmental changes.

the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Global environmental changes can happen quickly or over extended periods and have compounding effects. Indigenous communities experience environmental changes that can lead to a decline in quality of life, illness or disease, and unwelcome cultural adaptations that extend to future generations. Due to limited resources and political marginalization, members of these communities may not be able to respond to or prevent these conditions. Cultural connections to the land and community, along with limited resources, impact Indigenous peoples’ willingness and ability to relocate to different geographic locations experiencing less damaging ecological changes or environmental risk. In this article, we respond to the Special Issue prompt probing “[m]ethods in which Indigenous communities engage within their environment and on the land to conduct research”. We begin by describing environmental change, followed by a scoping review of Photovoice studies focused on environmental issues. Environmental changes affecting Indigenous groups are discussed, including a case study and a discussion of the ways that Photovoice can support and honor Indigenous peoples’ connection to the natural environment. This article is not intended to be an exhaustive review, but rather seeks to understand how Photovoice is being used to respond to and document environmental change, and how such visual methodologies can be used in Indigenous communities.