There is no scheduled court session today, Monday, March 1, 2010. I will post the new schedule as soon as it is available.
RECAP OF THURSDAY’S COURT SESSION Part 2 of 2
Yesterday I mentioned that a woman whom I have named KD, the present caregiver for all three Bayne children was in the witness box on Thursday, February 25, 2010.
During her testimony she acknowledged that even with concerted efforts, not everything is perfect in the care home. She mentioned there have often been tears shed by the children as they miss their parents. (I originally wrote that KD mentioned accidents that happened in the home as in any home and that she cited two examples. i.e. The middle boy falling down stairs resulting in a substantial bruise on his forehead and the youngest child slipping from the caregiver’s arms and bumping her head on the bathroom floor. KD has corrected me on this testimony making it clear that there were no injuries. The boy's fall was ON a stair rather than down the stairs, and his bruise was a tiny one while the girl's incident produced no bruise or behavioural response and neither incident required a doctor or a report. )
The Bayne parents had expressed concern about replacement care on one occasion when caregivers went on vacation for three weeks. They learned in court that the caregivers’ twenty three year old son, whom his mother considers competent to look after children but who had not previously cared for young children for any extended time, was the person who substituted for the caregivers. The young adult is a responsible musician as a DJ and as a composer with a band known as `Whiskey Jack`. Readers should note that KD has actually written a comment to this post in which she informs us about her son and the respect that he rightfully deserves in addition to the healthy relationship he has with the children that warranted the decision for him to provide this service. Among the things she says is this. Her son was "interviewed and approved by her social worker in Human Resources. They expressed no concerns about him. He also had two criminal record checks, Canadian and International, Why International? Because he spent his own money to join me on a trip to four countries in Africa so that we could go visit our foster children with World Vision."
As the day concluded Doug Christie asked the witness about an email she had sent to a resource worker concerning the placement request for the children. She had referred in this email to a condition with which the baby was apparently diagnosed, namely Glutaric Aciduria Type III. She said that children with Glutaric Aciduria are often misdiagnosed with shaken baby syndrome. She was wondering if this was ruled out as having an effect on the little girl’s shaken baby diagnosis. Doug Christie asked to see the placement forms and found that it stated `sister was born with a very rare medical condition Glutaric Aciduria type 3. He asked that it be submitted as an exhibit to the court. The witness further commented that later she had received a telephone call from the Ministry expressing that the baby had been tested and the conclusion was that the baby did not have this rare disease. KD said that she herself had never seen the test results. (The parents have also not seen the test results nor did they receive a phone call. It has been expected that they should rely upon this reported phone call rather than the placement form information.)
Bayne sympathizers certainly trust Judge Crabtree is able to discern that all the discrepancies do not point to Bayne unfitness as parents.
I am just praying, hoping and willing this to work out for you all! I KNOW God is watching over you, (and my family) and am waiting in earnest to hear the good news one day. Stay strong, much love and respect to you Paul and Zabeth.
ReplyDeleteWith each consecutive report following this trial, I cannot help but wonder at this situation that the Bayne Family finds themselves in. The more I hear or read, the more I wonder at the rationalle behind the decisions that have led us to this point. I do not have any degrees or even much exposure to court processing, but I am an intelligent adult. Seems to me that the decision to charge this family with such strong accusation should have been recanted long ago. Is it a case of th MOCP saying,' Well we've opened up a can of worms , guess we better carry on with the mess we have created here . People are watching, what would they think if we admitted this got off on the wrong foot?'
ReplyDeleteSomeone made a mistake, we can all see that very clearly. It is time to do the right thing. Reunite the Bayne Family now. Before more time goes by and more damage is done.
I am "KD". I have read these blogs to try and stay apprised of what is happening in court because I couldn't be there. This is a very stressful time for myself and my family. We are innocent bystanders, rearranging our family to incorporate, love, and nurture the Bayne children, and have now been swept up into this horrible story. Although angry, I will try to answer with respect.
ReplyDeleteMy son, whom you disparaged in your comment, is not just a "competent DJ and composer with a band named Whisky Jam" - the name is actually Whisky Jack, a small community up at Whistler where his grandparents have a ski cabin. The local birds are Whisky Jacks. But read into it what you want. I hear such sarcasm in your voice. What is wrong with being a musician - isn't Zabeth a musician? Your wording is disrepectful. My son, whom I mentioned in court, graduated with honours at St Michaels University School, was selected as a prefect for his leadership skills, and was a role model for the younger boys. He also spent his entire youth learning piano, and spent a year at Kwantlan University School studying classical guitar. He is taking a hiatus from his program at the Art Institute for Sound Production and Engineering, and worked throughout the Olympics as a security guard with the Commissionaires. He is obviously not unreliable.
Taylor was interviewed and approved by my social worker in Resources. They had absolutely no concerns about him. The only comment was that they were concerned that he might one day choose to be a social worker - and who wants that job??? He also has two criminal record checks, Canadian and International. Why International? Because he spent his own money to join me on a trip to four countries in Africa so that we could go visit our foster children with World Vision. He also stayed at the hospital with myself and my younger daughter when she was diagnosed at six with diabetes, to learn to give her the four injections of insulin/day she needed to stay alive.
Let's stop pretending we're worried about the boys around my decision. The point was not about "were the boys well cared for?" They were absolutely well cared for. The point is to try to damage mine and my son's character. Why don't you ask "WHY" did I choose my son? - not asked in court ... worry about the boys if I had made a different decision. Our trip to Italy, planned long before the boys ever arrived at our home, was a grad gift to another foster child, who's mother died the year before, so she could visit her mom's village. What were our options? We could have easily MOVED THE BOYS AGAIN - I know many competent foster parents who do respite. That wasn't a problem. But it meant MOVING THE BOYS AGAIN. Out of their beds, away from their toys, with new people AGAIN, with new rules AGAIN. I can only imagaine the heyday the Baynes would have had with that!!!
The boys absolutely adore Taylor. He lived at home. They followed him everywhere. He knew better than any respite "home" what their likes / dislikes / fears /joys /and habits were. He was very aware of the "Bayne rules" - no super heroes, no tv, etc, etc, which would have been impossible to expect elsewhere for a short duration. He was involved in their bedtime routines (bath/story/prayers and how they like their blankets) He had looked after them many times. Our housekeeper came 3 days/week,8 hours/day to do cooking, cleaning, and laundry. A good friend of mine came by once/week to bring dinner and stay for a few hours. Taylor took the boys to the beach, the park, the Aquariam, play dates, and Science World. He had a list of important data he needed - doctors, social workers, After Hours; the neighbours were "on call"; we stayed in email/telephone contact throughout our trip. He did an excellent job.
KD again ... I couldn't post all my comments together, and had to split them up ...
ReplyDeleteThe one thing I draw comfort from is that when the Baynes and their lawyer were scouring through my log book, found nothing of consequence, and so focussed on two "incidents" of small falls, they would have read countless, upon countless incidents of how well their kids are doing, how loved they are, and how much we are doing for them ...
With regards to the "injuries from the two falls" - there were none. Absolutely none. Baden, who fell down ON a stair, not down the stairs, ended up with a tiny bruise on his forehead, and Bethany had nothing, absolutely nothing - no reaction, no change in behaviour, no bruise, no bump, absolutely nothing. What was there to take to the doctor? What was there to report? These were not "falls" that produced broken bones, brain injuries, or bleeding. Don't compare them, please.
KD, I truly regret that you received the impressions you did from reading my post. I honestly sought not to be disparaging or insulting, There was no intention on my part to speak ill of your son. I had no sarcasm either in my attitude or in what I was saying. I appeal to you to understand that you heard me incorrectly. I meant no disrespect. What I understood was that the Baynes originally may have suspected that a teenager was left in charge of the children but were relieved in court to know it was someone older. And as you point out, it would be good for me to have known more or all of the facts, even about your son, his relationship with the children and the process by which you decided and he agreed to this service. Mine were abbreviated pieces of data. My apologies to you and to Taylor for unintended injury. I try to be careful in how I portray things. I will seek to be more careful.
ReplyDeleteGlutaric Aciduria type 3 doesnt exist. Look it up.
ReplyDeleteAs Bethanys home for the first 2 years of her life I can say that although Bethany had some feeding issues due to her global development delay and her Cerebral Palsy that she was in fact a very good eater. Bethany loves protein rich food such as meat, eggs, cheese, and beans. The same food that would have devastating affects on a child diagnosed with Glutaric Aciduria. If there is still belief that Bethany has this disease then why not test the parents? BOTH parents must be carriers for this very rare inherited disease to be passed to their child.
Also there are injuries to Bethany that do not fit with Glutaric Aciduria such as a tiny fracture in her arm already healed by the time she was placed in care and a fractured femur as well. How are those explained?
I appreciate the revisions to your blog. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteIsn't it a hard thing to be misunderstood and difficult to think that someone is referring to you in disparaging terms. Worst of all, people believe those whom they have accepted as credible. Erroneous information in one blog can really be offensive! While offense can be taken here, the opportunity to discuss and correct the difficulty is clearly present. Sincere apologies can be made. Consider being misunderstood and misrepresented to caregivers and others again and again by people who have taken your children. No court case, and no chance to defend yourself or even know what is being said. Yes, seeming injustice is painful and even enraging!! We all need to consider how painful is real injustice.
ReplyDeleteTracy G3 does in fact exist. Google it. What does not exist is a specific reliable test to confirm or rule it out. Most medical tests have four possible outcomes..not one. All medical tests have failure rates. All medical conditions have differentials that should be taken note of and often are not in my view. Medicine and Law are things that are generally practiced. Just because people practice something for years does not mean everyone gets good at it. Both have inherant risks and flaws.
ReplyDeleteRecent research into well defined and diagnosed diseases like M.S. originally thought to be autoimmune are being looked at and researched as lack of blood flow in the neck veins. New research into Diabetes is proving/changing previously held beliefs. Laws, legislation, and Think Dirty regeimes are supposed to have changed to. Time will tell if that is fact or fiction.
As an interested observer, I did not get from Ron's blog there was any indication of negativity towards KD, but a rather dry citation of facts. The minor corrections by KD were appreciated.
ReplyDeleteWhy did KD testify, when the only point of the trial to find out of the Baynes harmed Bethany. RCMP didn't interview any foster parents.
With KD testifying, her identity, and the location of her home could potentially be revealed to parents of the other children she is caring for. Isn't their identity and location is usually kept secret by the Ministry, so why KD was asked to testify.
I think the aspect of KD citing the bonds and attachment to children that competes directly with the natural parents really does demonstrate that the best interestes of the children are not being adhered to by the Ministry. The children have been separated from each other and their parents for nearly two and a half years. Using four foster homes confuses the children as to whom they should form attachments. Eventually the children learn there is no point in bonding with anyone, then this becomes a long term attachment disorder. This is nothing to do with KD and certainly not her fault. KD is just one recipient of generous taxpayer funds out of the four foster homes that the children lived in.
Presumably the children would become attached to each caregiver in turn, as well as be expected to maintain their bond and attachment to their parents and siblings in the arbitrarily allotted time of 6-hours per week.
Why can't the Baynes cannot have the same amount of of time with their own children as KD does, since the 6 hours weekly they do get with their own children, is presumably due to the concept that they are innocent until proven guilty, and continuing this association is viewed as beneficial the best interests of the children. If there is a nanny, why not simply provide this nanny to Paul and Zabeth in their home, as this person would do double duty as supervisor and assistant.
If the Ministry has not presented any evidence over a two year period of intense observation of the Bayne's care of their children, why continue allowing KD this advantage of time and inevitable buildup of bonding and attachment between KD and her son at the expense of the children's parents, and then claim broken bonds as justification for permanently separating the children?
Since caring for the Baynes children and others is KD's job and recipient of taxpayer funds for caring for 5 children, could she please provide what income she receives per month caring for all of these children. I am told for each child this amount is in the range of $800-$1000 tax free per month. For "Special Needs" children this would be $1,700 per month.
I knew of a mother of four children who cannot work, who received for all four children, $850 per month total, in government child-related funds.
Also, what is the square footage of the foster house with the five children and nanny staying in it and what is the value of the home?
From reading this blog that the children were not being taken to church by KD because they might be recognized by members of their community -- isn't that exactly what the purpose of church is for? To be part of the community and recipient of support and recognition? Surey the best interests of the children would benefit from seeing recognizable faces and maintain their connections with other children they grew up with.
The concern I have as a parent and taxpayer reading through the progress of the Baynes trial, is discovering the government has this remarkable unfettered power to separate children from their parents under an unresolved cloud of suspicion for well over two years. Armchair blog judgements aside, if it does take 3, or 6 weeks of trial to resolve such a matter, then what is the reason for waiting two and half years to get to that trial when eveyone agrees this delay is not in the best interests of the children or taxpayer finances?
Anonymous, I am not a fan of anonymous writing. Sure wish you would give yourself a name. I just may remove the ANON option. I appreciate the general intention of your comment, but…
ReplyDeleteIf KD reads your comment she may wish to comment in turn. Good enough, but I am going to make a couple of clarification comments of my own here first that may diffuse the way your piece comes across.
1. I believe that near the beginning you have wondered for what purpose Jensen would ask KD to testify when she had no direct connection to the primary issue of this case – the suspected harm Baynes caused their daughter.
2. You are not questioning the loving care and relationship that KD seeks to provide to the children but you are questioning the Ministry’s management of the case in allowing so little visitation time to birth parents and taking 2.5 years to come to trial, all of which militates against the Bayne relationship with the children.
3. When you make reference to funding, the point you are making is not so much the amount of money foster parents receive per child but rather the disparity between that sum and the significantly lesser amount of money a birth mom may receive in allowances.
4. Finally, I have absolutely no idea why you would ask for the square footage of the foster home with the number of residents within it, and I puzzle to understand why you would ask for the value of the house.
In Tracy's comment she notes a fracture on her arm. This is false as the two other doctors - Dr. Colbourne and Dr. Alexander showed the films in court and there was no other fracture at all. Also the radiology reports state no other fractures. There was no fracture according to the radiologists
ReplyDeleteAlso there is such as thing as Glutaric Type 3, but it is even rarer. Please see links to the medical journals below.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h2856608557g2661/
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/klu/boli/2002/00000025/00000006/05113452