The Baynes would concur with the rest of us that the hospital staff, the medical professionals, and the Ministry were not just within their rights, but were actually right to suspect child abuse and to run tests and to investigate. That is how the system must work if all the necessary tests are conducted and a thorough investigation is completed. It is designed to affect its purpose for the sake of our society and our children. But the process derailed when the Ministry insisted that a suspicion of abuse that ratcheted up the risk monitor was more significant than the RCMP investigative conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge the Baynes with abuse. Left to the RCMP alone, the children would never have been removed from the Bayne parents.
As far as the Ministry was concerned there was sufficient suspicion to remove three children from Paul and Zabeth, even though only the youngest was the one with the injuries from which the altercation stemmed. I said ‘sufficient suspicion’ rather than ‘sufficient evidence.’ The Ministry has had to maintain that suspicion for two and one half years. The ministry might insist that has not been difficult because the risk is so obvious. I claim that maintaining suspicion of the Baynes has not been easy to do because there is no evidence. In fact evidence that Paul and Zabeth are good parents and respected people had to be ignored in order to preserve the suspicion of risk. Only suspicion existed initially and only suspicion remains today. Yet the suspicion has become the equivalent of evidence in the Ministry’s mind. Now the Ministry has proceeded all the way to the Court still insisting that the Baynes pose a high enough risk to warrant the continued care/custody of the three children by the government Ministry. More than that, these children must be protected from their birth parents until they reach adulthood. The Ministry has come to Court needing to convince a judge that its suspicions are synonymous with evidence. This is just my take on it but I don’t think that the judge is convinced. Oh and of course the Ministry’s lawyer advised the Ministry months ago that a case could not be made to continue holding the two older boys, but the Ministry ignored that counsel, presumably because their suspicions are still defensible. Well they’re not.
Ron, you are a good friend to Paul and Zabeth Bayne and to the people of BC for your faithful writing of this blog. Without the blog and the earlier efforts by television news reporters, I think this family would not have had a glimmer of hope for justice. I sincerely thank you all!!! I also thank Mr Christie for giving so much because just because he believes in justice.
ReplyDeleteI am disappointed that more of us will not give of our finances. I am disappointed more of us will not make the effort to get to the Chilliwack court hearing. I am disappointed because I recognize any of us could be in the same situation with a simple accusation.
People of this country have held to the belief that our gov't agencies, particularly the social services agencies, are agencies of compassion and justice. Wherever there is mention of this case, people usually respond that there must be something more that hasn't yet been made known. People do not believe that social workers, as in this case could possibly shred documents together or submit "evidence" to a judge which they knew to be false. They meet people, accused like the Baynes have been, and believe that certainly, these are people who have done something terrible. They get a look of "knowing."
The MCFD is an agency filled with people who exude compassion for helpless victims, and seek justice for all. That is why they have such trust!! They can act immediately to intervene for the helpless. There are laws that govern their office; laws that give balance of power. There are laws that demand a case come to court within a certain time frame.
That is why we don't go to the courtroom and that is why we don't think we need to help with finances. It is not because we are bad people.
We don't consider that social services officials could possibly regard themselves above the Rule of Law. We have been taught to think this way. We accept this view early in our education.
Until we are in the place of those like the Baynes, what Canadian would consider that we are in the hands of some very sinister people.
My trust has been rocked to the core.
It is my sincere hope that this court in Chilliwack will restore some belief in Canadian justice. That would mean that the social services charges some of their own. It would mean that the Bayne family are respectfully heard and reimbursed for their expenses to go to court in order to be heard. It would mean the return of their children. It would mean that compensation be given to them immediately in order to get their family reestablished.
Wow Bernice that really sums things up well. I agree with what you have said here. People really do believe that for something like this to happen the parents MUST have done something really terrible....There is the odd person that doesn't have this blind trust of government but these people are few and far between. I also hope that this case will open people's eyes to what really goes on in our "system". I also hope that the Baynes will truly see justice in every aspect of their situation.
ReplyDelete