The curious thing for me is that I didn't know that we were in a child welfare mess until I involved myself in the stories many of you are telling me about the Ministry of Children social workers' invasions into your lives. I was one of the uninformed and who knows what percentage of Canadians today have no idea what happens when these highly empowered agencies have cause to learn your name. They have the broadest intervention powers in the Western world Libin quotes Brad McKenzie, social work professor from U. of Manitoba. Then Libin writes, “Caseworkers come armed with vaster powers than any police officer investigating crime. It is an immense authority easily abused, without vigilant restraint. It is time, critics say, they were reined in." He quotes children's advocate Katherine McNeill who says, "The social worker system, as it applies to children, is out of control, seriously out of control. And nobody’s doing anything about it.”
If you didn't find his article earlier I am convinced you will now want to read what he had to say. Here he quotes three critics of the child welfare enterprise.
“The social worker system, as it applies to children, is out of control, seriously out of control, and nobody’s doing anything about it,” says Katherine McNeil, a children’s advocate working with families in Nova Scotia and B.C.”
“They violate all kinds of privacy and rights,” says the senior counsel for the Home School Defense League, Chris Klicka, who represents Canadian and American parents.
Marty McKay, a clinical psychologist who has worked on abuse cases in the U.S and Canada said that the work of child-welfare organizations has become “parenting by the state and the imposition of their value system on other people.”When Libin wrote in 2009, he said that children's aid society workers would intervene in the lives of 200,000 of Canadian children that year.
Read the entire article here.
Parenting by the state is exactly what this is all about. As the government gets larger and more powerful, so will its ability to take our children. If we don't like what child protection does to families and children, then we must seriously consider our politics. Government should be afraid of the people, not vice versa.
ReplyDeleteThe only political party that really seems to be adamantly opposed to the violations inherent in the child protection system is the Libertarian party. It is not coincidental that Doug Christie is a Libertarian. It's imperative that we stop believing that government is the solution to our problems. Government, all too often, is, in reality, the cause of our problems. It certainly is the cause of problems for hundreds of thousands of foster children and families who have been destroyed by CPS.
Journalists are eloquent in publishing such information, however there are often few solutions proposed in their articles.
ReplyDeleteOne has to look at other countries such as Japan and other non-western governments to get an idea of the occurrence of "true" abuse towards children by parents versus the western world's expanded view of child protection and combined welfare systems, where they treat any child that fits into "a" category the same, by simply removing them and imposing services and values at great cost.
The remedy, as some commenters state, is quite simply, take away the powers of child protection agents that act personally remove children where no criminal charges exist. Even then, terminating parental rights would not occur in that instance, in the same sense that when we send our children to school or daycare to be temporarily parented, we do not lose our parental rights.
An interesting statistic to compile would be the number of parent years the Ministry is responsible for suspending due to non-criminal charges versus parents who lose children to the state due solely to criminal charges stemming from abuse by parents.
Imagine a police officer removing a spouse he deems has been harmed by their partner and putting that person in a fellow police officers home for a few years, pays them thousands of dollars per year for several years while the matter is being "resolved." Judges really have proven themselves irrelevant in intervening court appearances.
The child protection system should be subordinate to the police, not the other way around.
It is my suspicion that true child abuse by parents as it meets the criminal code threshold is as rare as parental child abduction and less then stranger abuse.
The primary purpose of child protection as I see it is system of wealth transference. However, very few journalists or public servants will go on record to say that. Nancy Schaefer, the Georgian Senator is one of the very few high profile politicians that has been clear in defining a financial motive for child protection.
Being poor, having a dirty house, or being overwhelmed, having children with social problems is not abuse or removal worthy, but can be considered a child welfare issue only, not a child PROTECTION issue.
A huge amount of legwork is required to show and prove removal for the majority of children is ineffective against curbing true abuse of a parent against a child.
I believe that it is the tinkering of the Campbell government that has destroyed the child protection system. I was involved with MCFD under the NDP and they had at their core a genuine mandate to help the families.
ReplyDeleteAt this time, it is not a happy system, even for those who are front line workers. I met many of them. It is very adversarial and it matters much more to MCFD to have collaterals against the parents than to help the children.
My son was very ill and it turns out that the doctors at BCCH got annoyed with the SW, of all things as she was trying to get a hold of me as a bad parent. They said to her that they wished every child had as nice and supportive a family as we are.
It was straightened out by the doctor, yet in my last meeting with the SW, she is still going on about the same stuff. My son saw some of the best doctors in B.C. and I took him there. Now, it is being said my MCFD that I took him to too many different doctors. Previously they said I medically neglected him, now I medically took him too many times to the doctor (!!!)
They still do not know what is wrong with him and there is a certain specialist who wants to work with us and has phoned me and will do further tests. But, he asked me when my file will close with MCFD as he does not want to deal with them.
It is interesting, as MCFD tries to take medical problems with children and act like they are repeating what the doctor has said. They took information I gave the doctor in a meeting we all had together and tried to present it to me as some special inside information they alone had from the doctor, that I did not have. They are always trying to get legal points against the parents by with holding information and it goes against the spirit of openness needed to solve complex medical cases.
They also get so lost in one diagnosis as they try to build a whole story around it when later it becomes apparent that it is the wrong diagnosis to begin with. It really clouds the picture.
Obviously, as in the case with Bethany, there has not only been the long struggle to get her back in her family, but now there is no doubt medical issues that are not what has been assumed by MCFD and it will be up to the parents to reverse all the wrong information and find out what is really needed.
I am in the same boat, but in a much lesser storm, so to speak.
I would like to see as a first order of change, that MCFD must have respect for police reports, and if the police do not think abuse has occurred, MCFD should not try to overrule that.
Secondly, I would like to see respect for the fact that SWs are not medical doctors, they are not metabolic specialists, and should have respect.
In my case, they are wrong and it has been proven, yet they still try to get me on something, like a drip that keeps coming out of the tap.
It is a horrendous waste of money for the taxpayer. My case has cost the taxpayer at least $20,000 and no findings of abuse came out of it!!!
Hi 9:50
ReplyDeleteDoug Christie may share some Libertarian values but his views are best reviewed at this site, http://www.westcan.org/ because he is a separationist, and would argue for Western separation. He is the founder of the Western Canada Concept (1980) and the Western Block Party (2002)
Please disabuse yourself of the idea that any particular political party in power makes any difference. I have worked under NDP and Socred. The senior bureaucrats run everything and they wreck stuff all by themselves. Don't forget that it was an NDP minister, Joy McPhail who got so fed up with things that she got the premier to bring on the Gove commission. She also fired the head child welfare bureaucrat. The cure turned out to be worse than the ailment.
ReplyDeleteIn response to Ray:
ReplyDeleteI don't believe any political party (with the exception of the Libertarian party) makes any difference, because they all (with the exception of the Libertarian party) believe that the more gov't power, the better. The Libertarian party would be better because their basic platform is less gov't is better. They do not believe in the nanny state, and they certainly would not believe that the state is a better parent. They ARE better than the NDP, etc., etc. (and I don't for a minute believe the NDP is the solution to child protection problems) because they are adamantly opposed to the kind of gov't intervention that child protection represents.
But since most people are very ignorant about the Libertarian philosophy, there isn't much chance they will be in power any time soon, even though many people would undoubtedly support if they were aware of this party stands for.
As for Doug Christie, he is both a separatist and a Libertarian, or as an article on his website puts it: "He differentiates himself from his... clients -- he's merely a libertarian and an ardent proponent of free speech, he contends."
What is reflected in the view that each person has the rights to raise their children without interference is the ideas of civil liberty. We are in a time wherein the government does want surveillance and control over people. It is a lack of respect for the individual. I have my own beliefs and that is reflected in my parenting. MCFD sees me as incompetent since I do not believe as they do about raising children. For example, I do give more independence and responsibility to each child. I have a large family and I need each child to help out. MCFD really picks on me, yet I do not see their ways being possible without tremendous amounts of support as they have a system of raising children that only works with one child or else lots of money. Besides that, I do not agree with MCFD.
ReplyDeleteWhen this article first appeared I hoped that the general public would take notice. It clearly hasn't happened. Currently in Ontario the general public is more engrossed with the laughable arguments from anti-windfarm advocates. I don't have the exact quote here but it goes something like the following, "If we can save even one child from the harmful effects of wind turbines it is worth the fight." The harmful effect referenced by the above quote is believe it or not "nosebleeds". If only the worst thing that we could fear from Child Welfare Agencies was nosebleeds. What will it take to enlighten the public to the real tragedy being played out across this country? I wish I knew.
ReplyDeleteWhenever any corrupt, greedy gang of thugs wants to make money and get evil power nowadays, it seems they use the ploy of protecting children. They've figured it out: if you want to con the people, just tell them it's all about the children. Even a certain notorious gang has used their pretence of fundraising for children to do public relations. The public is largely in the dark, and seems to swallow the lies, hook, line and sinker.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bukisa.com/articles/58098_the-angels-of-hells-angels
ReplyDelete"There's no doubt that the motorcycle club Hell's Angels have a bad reputation. They do not trust anyone outside the club, they have been under investigation for drugs, murders, assaults anything you can think of they've been accused of it. But if you look at the amount of charity work they perform, you may think a little differently about them...."
Maybe, maybe not.
Anon 10:21 AM - What possible connection has your comment about Hell's Angels to do with anything on this blog site?
ReplyDeleteOh, I get it now...you were making the point that anyone can use 'children' to get what they want, even an improved public image. the last two comments were yours --- there was a connection.
ReplyDeleteMy family is actually 1 of those families being targeted by CCAS and we have found out just how little help there is out there for families being tortured by these agencies who have too much power and when they figure out they made a mistake they can quietly sweep it under the rug and continue to ruin the family since theres no one out there to investigate them.
ReplyDeleteI wouls love to know of any agency or person that could help my family if its out there .