Monday, April 26, 2010



The Ministry’s lawyer thinks that the boys should be given back to their parents but he will ask that they not be returned. Figure that out!

This is the week when Judge Thomas Crabtree, newly appointed Chief Justice of British Columbia is scheduled to hear the counsel for the Ministry of Children and Family Development, Finn Jensen speak to the application that Paul and Zabeth Bayne have made through their lawyer, Doug Christie, to have their two sons, the eldest of their three children, returned to them immediately.

It has been expected that Mr. Jensen will make statements in opposition to this application. Well that’s professionalism for you. Because in fact, he informed his client, the Ministry of Children, that there was no evidence to support the continuing custody of the two boys. He made it clear that in his opinion he could not win this order in court. How can we know that? Well, his letter to Ministry execs was leaked. News media and networks have it. He counselled the Ministry to return the boys to the parents, namely Paul and Zabeth. This was his professional advice last spring 2009 but the Ministry ignored that advice. It was as though they were saying, “we don’t care that there is no evidence to support keeping the boys.”

So here Mr. Jensen is in court this coming Thursday morning obliged to argue for the retention of the boys because his advice to his clients was disregarded. At least if no one has changed their minds that will be Mr. Jensen’s role. Don’t you admire such professionalism? No? To be able to argue ardently that there is justification for the Ministry’s hold on the boys when he himself believes the opposite.

I understand that there is principle involved in representing a client. What the client wants, the client gets. A client is not obliged to take your advice. There is a significant payment for services rendered. Of course I understand that too. What do you do with your conscience? That’s what puzzles me. When you know that the client is not misled by inaccurate information or imprudently diligent but rather, recklessly wrong, it is the epitome of professional practice to continue to represent your client’s cause. Somebody has to do it.
Art by Griff Williams, 2005


  1. Allowing such an application to be heard in the middle of protection proceedings a remarkable achievement. No matter the outcome, I suspect the media will pick up on this and report the significance. Either way, I suspect this will not be good press for the Ministry.

    It will be interesting to see the argument Mr. Jensen puts forward to oppose the return of the boys, given the fact he was the one that recommended their return last year. Clearly though, from the Ministry's point of view, a return of the boys significantly undermines their case.

    Finn will look rather silly if he continues to blather on about some unspecified dangers the parents represent to their children when they have no derogatory information over the past 2-1/2 years that justifies their continued retention.

    The substandard foster care with all the injuries the children have received in care would serve as an argument in the parent's favour, so I would trust that all of this will combine to support the application to return the boys.

    I'm sure the MCFD bean counters and foster parents don't mind the money that comes in while the children remain in care, and I as a taxpayer would be very pleased to see this hemorrhage of money to stop.

  2. This lawyer should

    a) go into court and argue in favour of the child going home despite his client's request

    b) quit and drop government as client

    c) keep talking to the public about what is right.

  3. I don't know how they can even sleep at night. The children belong with their parents asap.

  4. I saw this article in cbc today, concerning a different BC family who asked for help from the MCFD, and instead had their 3 children taken away. Eventually 2 of them were returned but the other one, the MCFD is keeping in FC, despite a $6000/month price tag! I hope these people also get their family back together soon and find healing! We see again the Baynes are not the only ones in such terrible circumstances because of the ways of the MCFD.


I encourage your comments using this filter.
1. Write politely with a sincere statement, valid question, justifiable comment.
2. Engage with the blog post or a previous comment whether you agree or disagree.
3. Avoid hate, profanity, name calling, character attack, slander and threats, particularly when using specific names.
4. Do not advertise