The Disproportionate Removal of Inuit Children from Their Mothers in Denmark
Denmark’s policies toward Greenlandic families and children from the 1800s to the present day reflect the broader history of colonialism, cultural assimilation, and eventual decolonization. One of the most distressing aspects of this history is the forced removal of Inuit children from their families, a practice that, despite the official recognition of the Inuit culture and language, seems to continue to this day.
Historical Context
While for the first part of the XIX century the primary focus of Danish colonization in Greenland was on resource extraction, notably whaling and later seal hunting, missionaries, particularly from the Moravian Church and later Danish Lutherans, played a significant role in the cultural assimilation of Greenlandic children. Their education was primarily religious and aimed at converting Inuit populations to Christianity.
In the mid-20th century, Denmark introduced formal education in Greenland and pursued policies aimed at “modernizing” and assimilating Inuit communities. A key part of this agenda involved taking Inuit children away from their families, following a protocol common to many colonial domains, such as the British with the Aboriginal community, the French in Indochina, and the US and Canadian in North America[1]. Between 1951 and 1957, dozens of Inuit children were sent to Denmark under the pretext of receiving better education and welfare. These policies were presented as a way to give the children a brighter future, but in reality, they often severed their ties to their culture and families.[2] In 1953 Greenland ceased being a colony and became an integral part of the Kingdom of Denmark. This led to increased Danish influence over Greenlandic society and policies, which included:
- boarding schools: Greenlandic children were sent to Denmark or to Danish-run boarding schools in Greenland, leading to disconnection from their families and culture.
- Language policies: Danish became the dominant language in schools and administration, marginalizing the Greenlandic language (Kalaallisut).
Becoming infamous is the so-called ‘Little Danes Experiment’, conducted by the Danish government in 1951, when 22 Inuit children were sent to Denmark from Greenland to learn Danish. All the children were supposed to be orphans, but the priests could not find enough subjects with these characteristics. Thus, only 6 were actually without parents. The experiment was part of a scheme to raise “model” Greenlanders to help bridge Danish and indigenous cultures. However, the children remained separated from their families, lost their mother tongue and struggled with identity issues for the rest of their lives.[3]
In 1979, Greenland was granted Home Rule, marking a significant shift towards autonomy. This change allowed Greenland to assume responsibility for various domestic affairs, including education, health, and social services, while Denmark retained control over foreign policy, defense, and constitutional matters. The introduction of Home Rule had profound implications for Greenlandic families and children. The new government prioritized the revitalization of Greenlandic language and culture, integrating them into the education system. Kalaallisut was increasingly used in schools, aiming to strengthen cultural identity among the youth. However, challenges persisted, including limited resources and the need to balance Danish and Greenlandic languages in education.
The Self-Government Act of 2009 further expanded Greenland’s autonomy, recognizing Greenlanders as a distinct people under international law with the right to self-determination. This act granted Greenland control over additional areas, including the judicial system and natural resource management, and established Kalaallisut as the official language. With increased self-governance, there has been a concerted effort to address social issues affecting families and children. Initiatives have focused on improving education by incorporating Greenlandic language and cultural practices, aiming to enhance students’ connection to their heritage.
Despite these advancements, challenges remain. The effects of historical assimilation policies continue to influence contemporary society, both in Greenland and in Denmark, contributing to issues such as identity struggles and intergenerational trauma. Moreover, economic dependence on Denmark poses constraints on the full realization of self-governance, impacting the implementation of policies aimed at improving family and child welfare.
Ongoing Discrimination
Although these policies are often described as relics of the past, similar issues persist today. In a 2024 case reported by The Guardian, an Inuit mother, Keira Alexandra Kronvold, had her baby removed immediately after birth by Danish authorities after she failed a controversial parenting test – the Parental Competency Assessments (FKU).[4] The parenting test in question stated that the mother lacked the necessary skills to provide proper care for her child. However, critics argue that the evaluation overlooked the support network the mother had within her community and her cultural approach to parenting. These tests, criticized for their cultural insensitivity and bias, disproportionately affect Greenlandic parents and perpetuate stereotypes about their parenting abilities. Activists and human rights organizations have condemned this decision, citing it as a clear example of systemic discrimination against Greenlandic parents.
In 2022 the Danish Institute for Human Rights has published a report titled Testing Parenting Skills of Greenlanders in Denmark – On the Use of Non-Culturally Appropriate Tests to Measure Parenting Skills in Connection with Forced Removal of Greenlandic Children, stating that:
When municipalities investigate the basis for the forced removal of Greenlandic children in Denmark, they generally use a number of tests to measure parenting skills. However, according to several sources, these tests are unsuitable because they are not adapted to the target group. Greenlandic parents run the risk of achieving low test scores, leading to the conclusion that they have reduced cognitive abilities, for example, without there being any actual evidence to support this. […] In Denmark, 7 per cent of children born in Greenland and 5 per cent of children with at least one parent born in Greenland are placed in foster care, compared to 1 per cent of other children.[5]
As reported by The Guardian, Kronvold’s case sparked furious protests in Copenhagen and in Nuuk from associations advocating for Inuit rights.[6]
These cases show that structural inequalities are still deeply embedded in Denmark’s welfare system. Parenting tests, which fail to account for cultural differences, unfairly target Inuit families. The continued removal of children not only echoes the past but also highlights the urgent need for reform to protect Indigenous families from ongoing discrimination. The lack of legal support for affected mothers leaves them without a voice in decisions that affect their lives and their children’s futures.
Parenting Tests: Design and Critique
The Parental Competency Assessments, known in Danish as forældrekompetenceundersøgelse (FKU), are tests used by Danish authorities to evaluate a parent’s ability to care for their child. These tests play a significant role in decisions about child welfare interventions, including the removal of children from parental custody.
The tests typically involve: standardized questionnaires, observational evaluations by professionals, and structured interviews are conducted to explore the parent’s background, mental health, support systems, and readiness for parenting responsibilities. As the Danish Institute for Human Rights’ report writes, psychological tests and methodology can be divided into the following main groupings[7]:
- Methods for testing and identifying cognitive functions, including intelligence and functional level as well as flexibility, attention and other executive functions.
- Methods for testing and assessing personality functions, including affect regulation, defence mechanisms, empathy, etc.
- Methods for observing interactions that help uncover themes in the parent-child interaction, including structure, attunement, reciprocity, etc.
Among the tests listed are: the so-called WAIS test (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale) IV, which tests parental IQ based on language comprehension, perception and memory; the Rorschach (Exner) test; the MCMI III (personality test); the RME (Reading the Mind in the Eyes), which tests the parents’ ability to interpret emotional expressions through pictures of faces; the PAI (mental and personality disorders); the LEAS (Levels of Emotional Awareness), which tests empathy and mentalisation skills. As the report states, all these tests are developed on a Western framework of norms and culture. Testing non-Western people without ‘extensive adaptations’ is deeply problematic.
Since the 1970s, several international studies have shown that IQ tests such as WAIS and WISC (Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children) result in consistent misclassifications of Indigenous people (USA, Canada, Australia), framing them as ‘retarded’[8].
Furthermore, the tests seem to be significantly sensible to linguistic proficiency. As Rune Nielsen, PhD and expert in cross-cultural neuropsychology and senior researcher at Rigshospitalet, interviewed for the report, stated:
The tests we use in Denmark are developed in Western countries for Western populations. And they are adapted to Danish conditions, i.e. Danish language and Danish culture primarily. So if you are not born and raised in Denmark with the Danish language and culture, you are at a disadvantage when it comes to solving many of the questions included in the tests.[9]
Another major issue is the cultural variance of communicating and expressing emotions, which, according to Naya Blytmann’s thesis How are emotions expressed in Kalaallisut[10], is significantly different between Danes and Inuit. Therefore, if the psychologist is not trained to ‘read’ the culturally different ways of conveying emotions, difficulties may arise in the actual communication between parents and psychologist.
A report from the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA) underscores that Greenlandic children are seven times more likely to be placed in foster care than Danish children, emphasizing systemic bias. “These tests reflect a Eurocentric perspective on parenting,” said a spokesperson for IWGIA. “They disregard the collective and community-based approaches that are integral to Inuit culture.”[11]
Legal Justifications and Violations
The removal of Inuit children has often been justified through laws and administrative rules supposedly designed to protect child welfare. But these actions violate several human rights:
- Right to Family Life: Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, to which Denmark is a party, protects the right to family life. Forcibly removing children from their families blatantly disregards this provision.[12]
- Gender Equality: Article 3 of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and of the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) have specific provisions for the ‘equal right’ of women and men to the enjoyment of human rights. Inuit mothers are disproportionately affected by these policies, undermining their rights as women and reinforcing outdated colonial stereotypes about their parenting abilities.
- Cultural Rights: recognized by numerous human rights instruments and specifically restated ad Article 11 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). Taking Inuit children and assimilating them into Danish culture directly violates these rights.[13]
Legal and Social Accountability
In recent years, there have been increasing calls for Denmark to take responsibility and provide reparation for its actions, both past and present. While progress has been slow, there are steps that could help address this ongoing injustice:
- Acknowledgment and Apology: After several years of demanding from Greenlandic officials, in 2020 Denmark issued an apology to the Inuit victims of the Little Danes Experiment[14]. While the acceptance of responsibility is an important gesture, it must be followed by concrete actions that include eradicating the colonial patterns still present in the culture and institutions.
- Legal Action: Courts in Denmark and international tribunals can play a role in addressing these violations, ensuring that Indigenous rights are protected and upheld.
- Reparation: Financial compensation for affected families is a critical step. But more importantly, efforts should focus on restoring cultural connections and providing long-term support for healing.
- Policy Reform: Future policies need to protect Indigenous families, considering their unique cultural contexts. Welfare systems must include gender-sensitive approaches that respect the rights of mothers and children.
Conclusion
The forced removal of Inuit children remains one of the most glaring examples of colonial policies’ lasting effects on Indigenous communities, particularly women. These actions reveal the gaps in existing legal frameworks meant to protect marginalized groups. However, this issue should not be viewed in isolation.
Today, Western and European media frequently highlight the discrimination and violence faced by women in other parts of the world, such as the oppressive laws imposed by the Taliban in Afghanistan. While these injustices are undoubtedly egregious and demand global attention, it is equally important to acknowledge similar systemic issues in Western countries.
The treatment of Inuit mothers by Danish authorities demonstrates that gendered and cultural discrimination persists even in nations that pride themselves on equality and human rights. Addressing these injustices requires a holistic approach that not only holds governments accountable but also challenges the biases embedded in social and legal systems.
[1] FIRPO, C., & JACOBS, M. (2018). Taking Children, Ruling Colonies: Child Removal and Colonial Subjugation in Australia, Canada, French Indochina, and the United States, 1870–1950s. Journal of World History, 29(4), 529–562. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26675297
[2] Sørensen, A. (2008). Assimilation and Cultural Loss: Inuit Children Sent to Denmark in the 1950s. Nordic Journal of History.
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Danes_experiment
[4] The Guardian. (2022). Danish parenting tests under fire after baby removed from Greenlandic mother. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com
[5] Institut for Mennske Rettigheder. Testning af Forældrekompetencer Hos Grønlændere I Danmark – Om Brugen af Ikke-Kulturtilpassede Tests Til Måling af Forældrekompetencer I Forbindelse Med Tvangsfjernelser af Grønlandske Børn (Testing Parenting Skills of Greenlanders in Denmark – On the Use of Non-Culturally Appropriate Tests to Measure Parenting Skills in Connection with Forced Removal of Greenlandic Children). 24 may 2022. Viewable here: https://menneskeret.dk/udgivelser/testning-foraeldrekompetencer-groenlaendere-danmark. All the reference to this report are translated by the author of this article.
[6] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/nov/25/danish-parenting-tests-baby-removed-from-greenlandic-mother
[7] Institut for Mennske Rettigheder. Testning af Forældrekompetencer Hos Grønlændere I Danmark, cit. p. 6.
[8] Ivi, p. 8.
[9] Ivi, p. 9.
[10] Trondhjem, N. B. (2017). How are emotions expressed in Kalaallisut. In N. Tersis & P. Boyeldieu (Eds.), Le Langage de l’émotion: variations linguistiques et culturelles.Peeters. pp. 397-426.
[11] International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA). (2021). Greenlandic children in Danish foster care. https://www.iwgia.org
[12] European Court of Human Rights. (1950). European Convention on Human Rights, Article 8: Right to respect for private and family life. https://www.echr.coe.int
[13] United Nations. (2007). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP). https://www.un.org
[14] BBC, Denmark apologises to children taken from Greenland in a 1950s social experiment, 8th December 2020: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-55238090