How have Indigenous communities and governments responded to discoveries of human remains at residential school sites?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Indigenous communities have led grief-informed, community-led searches and memorialization efforts after discoveries of human remains at residential school sites, while federal, provincial and local governments have provided funding, crisis supports and policy responses — for example, the federal Residential Schools Missing Children Community Support Fund had provided more than $246.7 million through 161 funding agreements as of March 31, 2025 [1]. Responses range from ground-penetrating radar searches and calls for further investigation (as with the Tk’emlups/Kamloops announcement of 215 possible remains) to efforts to designate or demolish former school buildings and create memorials, with governments emphasizing Indigenous leadership and the need for culturally appropriate processes [2] [3] [4].
1. Indigenous-led investigations: truth-seeking on their terms
Many Indigenous nations have driven the work of locating, documenting and commemorating possible burial sites using methods such as non-invasive ground-penetrating radar and archival research, insisting that investigations be survivor- and community-led rather than externally imposed. The Tk’emlups te Secwepemc announcement that a preliminary radar search uncovered what were believed to be remains of 215 children illustrates how nations initiated searches and publicly framed findings as “undocumented deaths” requiring Indigenous direction [2]. Federal and provincial funding programs were designed to support such community-led activity, reflecting Indigenous calls to control process and meaning [1] [5].
2. Government funding, services and policy frameworks
Federal and provincial authorities have responded by allocating money and establishing frameworks intended to support Indigenous priorities. The federal Residential Schools Missing Children Community Support Fund reported deploying over $246.7 million through 161 agreements to fund community-led, survivor-centric initiatives for locating and commemorating burial sites as of March 31, 2025 [1]. Provincial programs in British Columbia coordinated with federal departments and the First Nations Health Authority to fund community-led strategies, investigations, and wellness supports after discoveries [6]. The Department of Justice and Indigenous Affairs bodies also point to work on a legal and reparative framework following independent interlocutor recommendations to ensure respectful treatment of gravesites [4] [5].
3. Trauma, mental-health supports and community priorities
Responses consistently emphasize wellness and culturally specific mental-health care because findings re-traumatize survivors, families and communities. Provincial announcements described coordinated mental health, cultural supports and immediate funding “to support the resiliency and healing of B.C. First Nations people,” and federal programs make trauma-informed processes a stated requirement for funded projects [6] [1]. Indigenous leaders and survivor groups have insisted that investigation, commemoration and any removal or repatriation of remains must prioritize families’ wishes and cultural protocols [1] [4].
4. Memorialization, site disposition and differing community choices
Communities make different decisions about what to do with former school buildings and grounds: some pursue historic-site designations and public commemoration, others prefer demolition as part of healing. Parks Canada and communities have collaborated on historic-site commemorations as a response to Truth and Reconciliation Commission calls to action, yet reporting shows some Indigenous communities declined federal commemoration, choosing demolition or local memorials instead — reflecting divergent priorities about remembrance versus erasure of physical structures [7] [3].
5. Public debate, denialism and demand for further evidence
Discoveries have generated national and international debate about how to confirm and interpret findings. The Kamloops radar announcement provoked both widespread shock and conversations about evidence: some polls reported portions of the Canadian public— and even some Indigenous respondents—wanted further confirmation such as exhumation (a 2025 Angus Reid poll is cited in reporting) [8]. At the same time, journalists and Indigenous advocates have warned about residential school denialism and called for attention to the historical record and Indigenous testimony rather than delegitimizing community-led findings [2].
6. Limitations and contested gaps in public reporting
Available sources document funding levels, some community choices, and high-profile early discoveries, but they leave gaps: reporting in these documents does not provide full national tallies of all investigations, detailed forensic outcomes for every site, or a comprehensive accounting of family wishes and repatriations nationwide. Sources note that thousands of children died and many burial sites remain unknown [9], and federal frameworks and interlocutor reports aim to address these gaps [4] [5], but exact numbers, timelines for exhumation or identification, and results of many community-led searches are not comprehensively reported in the cited material (not found in current reporting).
7. Why this matters: accountability, healing and international scrutiny
The discoveries have re-centered the legacy of forced assimilation and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s findings that the residential school system amounted to cultural genocide, prompting renewed demands for accountability, documentation and reparative steps [9]. International attention — including references at the UN level — and government statements committing to work with Indigenous communities underscore the political stakes and the widely divergent perspectives on how truth-seeking, commemoration, and justice should proceed [2] [4].