- As I think specifically of the British Columbia's Ministry of Children, there is a level of intervention that I recognize as being necessary to keep children safe in evidential cases of abuse or neglect by a parent or caregiver.
- I recognize the commitment and care provided by some MCFD social workers with high professional standards who ensure the protection of children in cases of abuse and neglect and those who work with families.
- Contrary to some who write comments here, given the two statements above, I cannot oppose all child removal situations by the MCFD.
- While the purpose of the Child and Family Community Services Act is to assist and support families and to remove children only as a last resort, I observe that child removals happen more frequently than that purpose would imply.
- MCFD child protection social workers do not consistently possess adequate investigative skills and some social workers exhibit callous attitudes toward parents with whom they deal. When parents feel that they are treated as criminals, which many do, that approach by a service provider is counter productive.
- MCFD regional office personnel and social workers at times display a judgmental and punitive attitude toward parents and caregivers. Unbalanced or biased investigations and risk assessments have distorted what is real and true. MCFD then persuades the court that intervention is essential for the child's immediate and ongoing safety. .
- The general population of B.C. expect that MCFD and the Family Court is acting in the best interests of the children but for many children removed and in care, their experience is unmistakeably damaging because they have been removed from their parents for months and sometimes for years. When removed from a loving and safe home, children suffer intense trauma and long term misery by being separated from their parents and siblings.
WHAT would you say?
By the way: Thursday Sept 30th, Finn Jensen resumes his case summation at 10AM to continue Ministry care of the Baynes' three children.
As it is true that MCFD SWs are exempt from the requirement of being registered by the college of social workers, and the requirements to be registered are very strict, I feel that they give other SWs a bad name.
ReplyDeleteThe one who wrote all kinds of crazy things on my file was responsible for my kids being taken. I did get my kids back, but of course I am now scared as I now know how easily they can be taken.
It is too much power to give one individual SW without the checks and balances of the courts. If the parents have to wait so long (as I did) to get their children back, the MCFD should feel the effects of the same system in their child removal zeal. (A longer waiting period for them too, why are they allowed to rush the presentation hearing through?? Yet, I had to wait almost three months for a court date to get my kids back?)
If I were strange enough, I could also phone in on another parent and make up things just because of ill will not even connected to children, but I could use the CPS system in that manner. That did happen to me. And if I were an unethical 'SW', I could write a complete piece of fiction and it is presented as 'evidence' in the same light as evidence acquired properly by the police.
But, it is not true, and of course I have to work on the next project, (which is hard since I am still busy taking all kinds of parenting courses as my terms of my order), I want to get these untruths off my file and meet others similarly affected!!!
I heartily agree Ron. There are many good social workers who have a tough job. Dealing with abusive parents and removing children cannot be easy. And SOMETIMES child removal is necessary. I, however, do not agree that the general population feels that the Ministry is acting in the best interests of the children or the family. Child removal is done way too quickly and as a first resort. Weighing the costs and benefits, not enough money is put into parenting classes, way too often and without enough checks and balances. Before a child is removed a police report should be filed and demonstrated that charges are appropriate. When a parent tells their child "I wish you had never been born" this is indicative of an over-stressed parent, not necessarily a bad one. What would benefit better - child removal or classes? How about those with post partum who lack 'adequate support'? Or those who lack the ability to clean their homes to a point where its acceptable to raise a child? Is it better to remove or provide support?
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a lack of parameters and alternatives; moreover, social workers with an overdeveloped sense of justice, as what seems to be with the Baynes case there is inadequate recourse. As a parent, I regularly tell my daughter 'don't do that. If you were to get hurt they could take you away from me'. I don't want to say this to her and I recognize that it has had a negative impact on her, but I feel that I must do it. Who benefits from that? My gf had someone call the Ministry on her saying that she had left her kids in the vehicle while she went inside a fast food restaurant to get dinner. She was within eyesight of the van at all times and in fact, she DID NOT have her kids in the van. But she was warned by the social worker who called that if they got another call of any sort that they would remove her kids. And so it affects her parenting to the point of not providing adequate discipline at the risk of getting another false call and having her kids removed without warrant. Who benefits from that? Certainly not the children.
Mens rea is (a) Latin phrase, meaning "guilty mind". A guilty mind means an intention to commit some wrongful act. Intention under criminal law is separate from a person's motive. If Mr. Hood robs from rich Mr. Nottingham because his motive is to give the money to poor Mrs. Marian, his "good intentions" do not change his criminal intention to commit robbery.
ReplyDelete(from Wikipedia)
It is interesting to consider the above in the context of child protection agencies. Why should we continue to accept that these agencies have any credibility, given their repeated acts of cruelty and terror against children and families. Just because something is a government organization, does not mean they are doing good, or even that they can be salvaged. MCFD is so corrupt it can only be abolished.
Ron would you be able to put together a meeting for ALL parents & children affected by THESE insane laws & THESE so-called public servants, who are so out of control as to do everything in its power to destroy everything/one they touch. We need to storm MLAs & parlaiment until this is changed.
ReplyDeleteThese SW who take our children are unhappy, mentally ill, liars, who have no lives so they have to play with other people's. It's 'fun' for them to make up stories as they get their pay every 2 wks whether they do their jobs or not. MCFD are fabricators of half-truth and/or twisting the facts to prove they are right as they don't care about children, they only care about being as ugly as possible.
Clearly BC judges have NO problem with these laws as sharks (lawyers) protect each other to destroying people, extorting innocent people's property & families. Why would decent judges listen to hearsay? Family court in BC is a farse.
Phoenix Human Services Vic., Boys & Girls Clubs are funded by MCFD & would not be able to run unless MCFD contracted its services. If MCFD contracts the service they OWN the INFO & can twist & turn the info to suit their lies, slander & to back up their mental illness & to make sure those kids stay in care for long as possible.
Corruption in BC gov't is so beyond what a person could even wrap their minds around. People have to get up & go 'circus freak' on these out of control 'gov't' swine.
These 'workers' are all protected by unions. Unions are the BIGGEST jokes & promoters of evil & corruption in the WORLD. I liken it to the Catholic Church & the pedofiles they protect & continue to protect. Corruption begets corruption. There are always a thousand laws & loop holes for the criminal, but HEY when it comes to innocent people or victims justice is not served.
Is this what the people of BC pay taxes for? BCers need to put a stop to out of control BC Liberal government who obviously has no concern for health & welfare of our most precious commodity OUR FAMILIES.
The lawyers, judges, directors, social workers, all agencies contracted by MCFD & all the other family destroying worker bees get their pay no matter who they hurt as they figure they ARE ABOVE THE LAW.
As good people have taken up the mantle to get rid of the HST good people are going to have to unite & DEMAND change.
Polak & Du Toit need to be removed as they do absolutely nothing to help unless it benefits them. The Ombudsman is no different. Who is Kim Carter and what does she do for her pay? Absolutely useless. SO again are BCers happy with out of control government spending money you GIVE them?
How can all these people in gov't know what is going on & do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to stop it? It is beyond insanity.
My son has been gone since March 2009. MCFD is going to do everything in their power to keep him permanently. I, like the Baynes do not neglect or abuse my child; yet the lies that have been told are beyond sickening...ALL b/c SW on my file is pure hatred, resentment, lies, slander, jealousy, 'she' is a control freak & figures only her opinion counts. She uses my child as a pawn. SW is NOT a parent nor does 'she' have a family.
I filed a compaint with the BC Human Rights Tribunal against MCFD for discrimination & was told after step 2 my complaint was dismissed. I have more than enough evidence to prove my case; yet because the Respondent is MCFD the BC GOVERNMENT won't hear the complaint. ALL THESE PEOPLE ARE FEEDING FROM THE SAME TROUGH & protect each other at any/all costs incl. the Attorney General in BC.
Well Anonymous 4:40 PM,
ReplyDeleteI read your entire comment so that I did not miss a thing.
First let me say, that if what has happened to you had happened to me when my children were young, I would probably have expressed myself the way you just did. So understand, that I do not fault you for the level of distrust and disgust you have for the levels of government and its officers. That being said, your comment provides me with an easy response to your first paragraph query. Perhaps your question was serious which compels a serious response.
A gathering and a march on our parliamentarians by parents and children who have been adversely affected by the laws and the public servants who apply them would be unthinkable to me when there is no way to guarantee restraint by participants. The best of communicative intention could be squandered by explosive and excessive rhetoric.
I would love to see such a march take place and it is only when people care enough to tell the truth about how corrupt it is in the current situation that we can get some results. I would love to meet others who have been through this whole thing.
ReplyDeleteI too would like to see a march take place. It is only when more publicity is gained that things will change. I don't support violence of course, but I do not believe the writer who suggested the march was in any way condoning violence.
ReplyDeleteNot really "on topic" but;
ReplyDeleteRepresentative for Children and Youth "Summit": https://www.regonline.com/builder/site/Default.aspx?EventID=868459
BC Association of SW Conference: http://www.bcasw.org/Images/Home%20page/Conference%202010%20online%20program.pdf
On the first point of substandard investigation, my observation is that follow-up on intake reports is likely the least developed skill of the 6 social workers I have personally have encountered. It would appear from talking with other parents and reading comments from others, this shortcoming is fairly universal. The assumption is that the parents will lie anyways, so social workers simply become better liars.
ReplyDeleteI believe Ray Ferris mentioned the inter-ministry child abuse guidelines which clearly outline proper investigative practices:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED263706.pdf
Mention this to the social worker and print out a copy and get them to show you which portion of the investigational procedure they are following in this guideline, so you can follow along.
The reason for social workers deliberately taking shortcuts and even making up information is quite simple. First off, it is because they can. Why bother rising to the standards of criminal law when none of that extra effort is rewarded, or warranted?
The hurdle of the Presentation Hearing is so blindingly simple to win for social workers, they know all they need to do is accumulate or fabricate as much information as possible to make it next to impossible for parents to properly examine and respond when this disclosure is given to them only the day before, or later.
At the Presentation Hearing stage, it does not matter if the disclosure is full of lies because the MCFD lawyer typically does not read out the intake reports and risk assessments in court at a presentation hearing. A smart parent or their lawyer will read out the inaccurate entries in order that they be preserved on a court transcript. This is preparation for the protection hearing a year or two later.
The social worker testifies in an abbreviated fashion only, just enough to "convince" the judge of an appearance of a valid concern of suspected abuse.
It is beneficial for MCFD demonstrate a "difference of evidence" as this always falls in favour of the director, as the government is assumed to be correct. As a precaution, the children stay in care of the Director until these so-called "facts" are sorted out, a year or two down the line.
Of course, all of this enrages the parent. It is beyond belief. Social worker seem to love this. First, they will recommend an anger management course.
Parents need to make sure they have a tape recorder and secretly record all meetings, and encourage as many meetings as possible. What social workers do NOT say, is often more important than what they do say.
The sneaky social worker often does not clearly or exactly explain concerns. This, after all may identify the informant. They don't explain your rights, or your children's rights, they don't discuss or offer services that would alleviate concerns (you must know to ask so you can force them to discuss services).
cw, thanks for the links
ReplyDeleteToday I went to meet with my SW. I was put under a supervision order for the thinnest of reasons last November. I did not know my legal rights and in all the time I have had help from the ministry in the past, I never needed to be supervised.
ReplyDeleteWhy would I get voluntary help from MCFD? Well, MCFD was not always the way it is now. It is easy to forget. I worked with children and they gave me daycare top-up for my own children. I worked in an after-school enviroment with kids who had open files themselves. I had four kids of my own. It was not always this big ordeal to know MCFD. I found them quite okay before. I know I am fanning some flames here, but that is my own true experience.
Then out of almost nowhere, because my 5 year old daughter was heard crying, I received extreme intervention. This time it was said that because of the length of time since my first involvement, 'historical involvement', MCFD had to 'get tough' with me. Plus I had so many intakes. I finally got my file, months later. I am the one who had the strange neighbour who phoned MCFD on me even when I was not here!!!! It was then stated that my children were 'no longer visible in the community' (as we were not here). That was because we had moved and they were going to school in a completely different place!!!! Yet that 'intake' stands on my file as well as many other strange ones, that I probably already wrote about on this forum.
My son got sick while I had an open file. My file was already proven to have no point since my GP had me undergo a psychiatric assessment with a top psychiatrist (not the MCFD one), and I am found with NO MENTAL ILLNESS. Still MCFD requires me to work on my 'mental health issues'.
At the hospital of all places, they knew I had an open file and they wrote their own subjective comments that somehow I was causing my son to be ill. HOW??? That is not stated. IT is all unproven allegations. In another circumstance, I could be upset with the hospital as they did not give him good care.
In a very contrived situation, they took guardianship of my son, even though he is almost an adult. It is because of a disagreement I had with a psychiatrist which turned out that I was right and they also would not retrieve his medical files from another hospital and instead wanted to repeat dangerous tests. These disagreements caused the one particular doctor to want to take control of the situation. I had just arrived and they told me they were taking guardianship of my son. NO reason given. Then with no reason at all, just because I had arrived there with my baby, they took her too. 'If one is at risk, they are all at risk.' Meanwhile, I kept taking care of my other kids, who were not with me that day.
I have done my best to follow everything and take every course and things are going really well. My son is healed and back in school and doing great. My other kids are all straight A students, they are responsible, kind and well raised.
Today I learned that my supervision order is to be extended yet another 6 months via yet another court date to be set later.
Why do they love court so much?
The link to the BC Social Workers convention is most interesting. This is clearly a very well organized affair, and the price is not too out of line at about $300 for both days on Nov 5-6 downtown Vancouver
ReplyDeleteThe first day appears to have just protection matters with issues covered on such subjects as First Nations neglect, Tools of Adult Protection Investigations, Privacy: The Balancing Act, Infant Neglect. Day two has Education outcomes for children in care, the rest are Health care focused.
The RCY conference web page is less polished looking, about the same price and clearly focused on children. Lots of doctors, professors and other qualified looking speakers (no photos).
If parents and associations are interested on finding out who they are up against when seeking change, I rather suspect the social worker conference would be an eye opener.