MCFD asserts that it is in the midst of a transformation program. Change is being enacted so the announcements claim. Yet here we are still telling these stories of families embattled by local MCFD caseworkers and their supervisors. I suppose it is right to say that if true transformation is to occur, the orchestrators must first know what needs changing. Someone is not getting it. Or, the change makers are pleased with the theory of transformation and how it appears in digital and printed documents but the continued flesh and blood interaction by MCFD workers with clients is not being affected by the lofty goals from Victoria. I do believe that great change is coming to this MCFD organization in the future. It has more to do with you and me and the thousands who will yet become vocal and visible as we advocate for what we know to be right and good. So much of this expected organizational and social transformation will occur because of the technological innovations that have made easier and faster the accessing of information, sharing stories and ideas and connecting with people than at any time before.
We are able to share opinions, organize campaigns, sign petitions, and start discussions with people all over this province, across the country and around the world. Children, youth and family welfare change activists are able to mobilize more people and coordinate action with a simple internet connection and an e-mail list. This is a connected world and in it there is an ever evolving role for social change organizations and perhaps this dialogue forum is one of those.
Perhaps as we become engaged in what we are reading and writing with regard to the issues that swirl around the improvement of the Ministry of Children and Family Development we can inspire one another to take action. Of what that action consists I cannot yet say but perhaps passionate people will step forward to become real change agents. Most of all we need people of influence with leverage and expertise and credential and respect to give impetus to these efforts to change a social agency and the legalities surrounding its work and decisions.
"Of what that action consists I cannot yet say but perhaps passionate people will step forward to become real change agents."
ReplyDeleteThere is only one change needed, ie. revoking government's authority to remove children from their parents except in several limited situations.
MCFD is good at putting up delusional changes that aims at misleading British Columbians to believe that changes will solve the problems in question. Any changes less than the foregoing will NOT solve the problem.
Special interests in the "child protection" industry rely on child removal authority to maintain their power, business and job security. They will not give this up without one hell of a fight. As long as government retains this power, our charter of rights is totally meaningless.
Locking arms with like-mind people is one of the keys to success. It is important that reformers are on the same page at every front. You are dealing with experts in divide and conquer. They will explore any differences and use them to their advantage.
I want to respond to you Anon 1:22 AM with a question or two, not critically but honestly.
ReplyDeleteIf we are to press for reform and we must be on the same page as you say, help me to understand how the one needed change can be 'revoking the government's authority to remove children?' Do you consider that to be a realistic objective? Is that what you truly believe we should all call for legislators to do? Would they listen to us if we called for that? Or, did you make a such a strong statement to underscore how horrific the present situation is?
There has to be a game plan around which potential reformers can earnestly rally don't you think?
I suspect that if 'revoking the government's child removal authority' was restated and qualified differently, it could be made an acceptable reform.
ReplyDeleteThere is little doubt that if such a policy existed, my children and the Baynes' children and the children of countless other parents would not have been removed because criminal charges were not laid.
A 6-month sentence for assault, is far less than the multiple years MCFD typically retains children in care while they blame delays in the justice system.
The focus should not be on how difficult implementing an agreed-up solution is, the question should be, will it solve the problem at hand and not cause more problems than it solves.
I agree that we must revoke the gov't power to remove children. And what people don't realize is that there would actually be less abuse if we did this, based on US research (we don't of course do that kind of research in Canada because we don't want the answer to that question).
ReplyDeleteThere is no way to guarantee the safety of children 100%. There will always be a certain number of children who are abused, no matter how many or how few the laws are. But with the way things are now, not only are children being abused, but families are being destroyed, and the most fundamential precepts of a democratic society are being demolished. That is particularly harmful - abolishing the presumption of innocence, treating parents as if they are always guilty and making them prove a negative.
MCFD and all child protection agencies all over the world know that all they have to do - to get the public worked up and demanding more funds and laws for child protection - is give the media one juicey child abuse story. And since the children in their care are always getting abused and murdered, there is no shortage of these stories. I don't believe that the child protection industry even minds these stories that ostensibly show, for example, how Baby P and others like him have been "let down" by child protection - because (and this has been proved) all it does, ultimately, is lead to more child abuse reports (and hence more apprehended children), more laws, more power, and more money for child protection. A few heads may role, but nothing of consequence ever happens. There is no such thing as "change" in child protection. Look at the history of it. You will see the only change is what the people make happen. That has yet to happen, but I too am confident that inking arms is what will work.
First of all, we need to understand what we are dealing with. Liars, pure and simple, for starters.
I am a different 'annonymous' than the above, I was interested that you brought up Pivot last time and it got me thinking. I believe that we need an organization with lawyers willing to work for policy change; but exclusively with grassroots changes to MCFD. Momentum is building as more and more people are coming out publicly to tell their stories.
ReplyDeleteVery good possibility Anon 11:43 AM.
ReplyDeletePlease any of you who are lawyers or have legal training, comment to this.
To: Anonymous (August 1, 2010 11:43 AM)
ReplyDeleteLawyers are one of the main beneficiaries in the "child protection" industry. You want to rely on lawyers to work out a policy of reform. They will only recommend reform for lawyers. Don't forget that CFCSA was made by lawyers and made for lawyers.
Ron; you raise some good points about these self-deluded buraucrats, who come up with brave new schemes to improve service, which make no impact at the point of client contact. The bureaucrats do not know how to fix the ministries problems. Their track record is that every time they try to "fix" a problem, they always finish up by making it far worse. The only real skills they have is in spin, which really qualifies them as among the best creative writers in Canada today.
ReplyDeleteI do not want to dwell on this today, because on Tuesday I want to continue to write about the events leading up to the passing of the CF&CSA. This will also describe the various attempted previous fixes and why they were obviously doomed to fail beforehand,because of fundamental errors of assumption. Those who do not learn from history (or their mistakes) are doomed to repeat it.
I am particularly attracted by rights violation lawsuits, such as the Canada Revenue Agency v. Hal Neumann of Saanich, who won a 1.3 million dollar lawsuit (1-day jury trial) for the pain and suffering cause to him and his family. The Cameron Ward $5,000 award for the police going overboard and strip searching is another example.
ReplyDelete----
Here is another story that was recently brought to my attention, and example of MCFD crushing a citizen with its power.
A potential foster parent who applied and was refused by MCFD. A human rights complaint was filed, the matter was accepted by the tribunal and the matter was destined for court. RCY provided extensive support, chiding the Ministry for their discriminatory actions and questionable tactics.
The Ministry used their internal legal staff and utilized social workers to embark on plan to gather negative information on this person. The day before the pretrial the Ministry presented a 25 pound box of papers that took all night to review.
Flooding someone with paper at the last minute is a very common strategy for the Ministry to use.
Early on, the Ministry concocted a "concern" about the prospective foster parent's "inappropriate" interaction with children in the course of his work which gave them the justification to start an investigation to gather information. They questioned employers, associates, other agencies in the same manner as if this person was accused of abuse, as if he was accused of abusing children in his care.
Questions were prefaced along the lines of "We are responding to a concern in which this employee's contact with children..." Only negative responses were documented.
It was a form of blackmail. The implication became very clear that the complainant would have to make a choice, to stay employed or continue fighting MCFD. Without a lawyer the risk was to lose everything trying to defend principals. Winning would have provided significant protection for the public in similar situations.
At the pretrial, the in-house ministry lawyer promised this level of pressure would continue if a withdrawal was not agreed upon. Forms for capitulation were helpfully provided, and subsequently signed.
Since the loss of children was not at stake, but job and reputation and loss of professional credentials were, the only choice available was to give up.
In a one-on-one situation, when you are outgunned, being right, having faith and hope and perseverance may not be enough.
Over the course of the year the estimate of MCFD expenditure on this matter was an estimated $200,000 and many months of lost time.
There are numerous positives in favour of the applicant throughout the story that occurred that I did not mention.
- Recordings of senior officials exist that would serve to embarrass the Ministry.
- RCY was extensively involved and wrote supportive letters to the limits of their authority.
- The children at the centre of the controversy were placed in a "heaven sent" foster home equipped with the most any child could ask for (although this professional was forbidden to visit these children unless supervised visitation was used.)
Had this individual access to equally powerful representation, the matter could have gone forward and there would have been a reasonable expectation of, if not winning outright, using the case to expose numerous questionable tactics used by the Ministry in the course of their preparation for this case.
Afterwards, the advice was to file a Freedom of Information request to gather the accumulated information to be used to fight another day, and possibly provide the information to another person to help in their case.
One view in this situation is there are perhaps a dozen other parents fighting in similar situations without any of the same benefits of accumulation of knowledge the Ministry has.
People need to share their experience so others may benefit.
I agree with anon 11:43 that lawyers are the main beneficiaries of the child protection process. There is so much court and even if by the time the court date arrives, the problems are resolved, the lawyers still want their turn to drag it out. It is very overly involved with court, why can't MCFD just help people like they did before and quit trying to take everybody to court?
ReplyDeleteBut there are obviously some 'good' lawyers. I have seen lawyers work to reform the rules around taser use and homelessness. Surely there must be some with a passion for reforming the child protection system.
ReplyDeleteIt helps sometimes to look at history. Canadians, at one time, were very much in favour of reinstating capital punishment. They had, however, a dramatic change of heart with respect to their desire to reinstate capital punishment; this was due in large part to the discovery of DNA evidence and its subsequent ability to determine innocence - including the innocence of those on death row.
ReplyDeleteThe same change of heart will occur with respect to parental rights and child protection. We now have one very well known and respected lawyer who has stepped up to the plate to defend the victims of a most gross injustice (i.e., Mr. Doug Christie). Other lawyers will follow in his footsteps, and the movement to expose the crimes - yes, crimes - of MCFD, and other child protection agencies in Canada and around the world, will grow.
All child protection agencies must know that they are like the Roman Empire; at their peak of corruption, yet also in their dying days. They are getting more desperate by the day; you can sense it.
Once the truth gets out, and hits critical mass, it will spread like wild fire. This will be like Nuremberg or any other mass movement seeking justice and compensation for victims of such cruel tyranny. Even the lowliest social worker must be aware that their days of unbridled bullying are numbered. The tables will turn. Now would be a good time for them to jump ship, but most if not all of them will not have the courage to even do that.