Thursday, September 2, 2010

TURPEL-LAFOND: ESTEEMED BURR UNDER THE SADDLE / Part 298 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

She is a bit of a burr under the saddle of the MCFD. It doesn't need to be that way. MCFD could regard her as an advantage. Her work has potential to make MCFD better.

In November 2006, Dr. Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond was appointed British Columbia's first Representative for Children and Youth. It is a five-year term and her responsibilities include; advocating for children and youth, protecting their rights and improving the system for their protection and support, particularly those who are most vulnerable. She serves all British Columbians under the age of 19, with an emphasis on young people in government care – such as those in foster homes, group homes or youth custody. These children and youth face greater challenges than those in the general population, especially related to health and education, incarceration and dependence on income assistance.

Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond, S.J.D. (born 1963 in Norway House, Manitoba) the youngest of four girls born to a Cree father and Scottish mother on a reserve in northern Manitoba. She is a member of the Muskeg Lake Cree Nation. She grew up in poverty, endured harsh physical mistreatment, and was surrounded by domestic violence and alcoholism in her home—a mirror of the upbringing experienced by many of the children she now encounters.

She is a Canadian lawyer and advocate for children's rights, and a judge on leave of the Provincial Court of Saskatchewan. At age 35 Turpel-Lafond was the first Treaty Indian to be named to the bench in Saskatchewan. She was the Administrative Judge for Saskatoon, involved in the administration of the Provincial Court of Saskatchewan in relation to access to justice, judicial independence projects, technology and public outreach. She has also worked as a criminal law judge in youth and adult courts, which led her to work at developing partnerships to better serve the needs of young people in the justice system, particularly sexually exploited children and youth, and children and youth with disabilities, such as fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

As a practicing lawyer, she appeared before all levels of Courts in Canada, including the Supreme Court of Canada. Turpel-Lafond has worked on land claims with the Indian Law Resource Center in Washington, D.C., and served as a key legal and constitutional adviser to aboriginal leaders. She has been touted for a seat on the Supreme Court of Canada.

By age 16, she was already at Carleton University, Ottawa, gravitating from math and science to politics, philosophy and eventually the law. Turpel-Lafond holds a Bachelor of Arts degree from Carleton University, a law degree from Osgoode Hall, a master’s degree in international law from the University of Cambridge and a doctorate of law from Harvard Law School. She also holds a certificate in the international and comparative law of human rights from the University of Strasbourg in Strasbourg, Alsace, France.
Time magazine has twice bestowed honours upon Turpel-Lafond, naming her one of the '100 Global Leaders of Tomorrow' in 1994, and in 1999 as one of the 'Top 20 Canadian Leaders for the 21st Century'.
Prior to her judicial appointment, Turpel-Lafond was a lawyer in Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan and a tenured professor of law at Dalhousie University Faculty of Law. She taught law at the University of Toronto, the University of Notre Dame and other universities, and held the position of Aboriginal Scholar at the University of Saskatchewan. She has been a visiting professor at the University of British Columbia and the University of Victoria law schools.

As the Representative, she doesn’t work for the government. Rather, the Representative for Children and Youth is an independent office of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia and does not report through a provincial ministry. Their work is based on the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child, and upholds the following values:
– Children have a right to be protected and kept safe
– Families are the best environment for raising a child
– Parents and extended family have the primary responsibility for a child
– Decisions made about a child should include their own views and input

Bio Information from her website
and from Wikipedia

7 comments:

  1. Why is Ms. Lafond not head of MCFD instead of Ms. Polak?

    It would appear Ms. Lafond is far more qualified and motivated towards doing a good job, but she is hamstrung in her current position.

    RCY does not have the resources to even process information MCFD delivers to her office so it can be properly analyzed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sincere Question: If I grant that you are correct that Turpel-Lafond is hamstrung presently, what reason or evidence do you have for your last sentence?

    As to your question, the RCY is an appointment (5 yrs) rather than an elected position. Another 5 yr term will have allowed her to invest 10 yrs into this work. The elected officer may be voted out, pulled out by the Premier. It is generally conceded that in the present structure, the Deputy Minister is the one wielding the power in MCFD because that too is contractual rather than elected, and therefore with skills and experience that match the job.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The UN if You look deep enough You get a Tribunal,not a Charter of Rights!

    Article 19,You have a right to freedom of expression if they agree!
    Article 26,You have a right to Thier Education!
    Article 28, Everyone is entitled to a New World Order.
    Article 29 section 1,Duty to Serve.
    Article 29 section 2,rights and freedoms can be limited
    Article 29 section 3 ,All rights are Conditional upon UN approval.
    Article 30 you have no right to oppose the UN.
    Article 14 section 2,If the UN wants to persecute You,there is no where to hide!

    I wouldnt look toward the UN and or its Treaties for Comfort!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The link I placed to the UN in reference to RCY is more in keeping with the Rights of the Child as articulated for the UN by Unicef. See CRY's Intro page http://www.rcybc.ca/Content/AboutRCY/Introduction.asp
    and then Unicef http://www.unicef.org/crc/

    ReplyDelete
  5. RCY's office is hamstrung with small budget. One story I found from 2007 stated their budget was 5.8 million. Compare this to MCFD’s budget of $1.3 billion. See http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=f6efeb6b-1617-4752-964e-e415a27440b7

    The call center cannot accept calls from parents according to one phone agent I talked to. This is a large source of direct information that is not available to RCY. In one case I know of, one RCY representative went to the hilt to try to ensure children in question were being treated fairly. One day, the rep. disappeared and there was no replacement help. The thoughts are if RCY attempts to over extend its authority, they are reined in.

    MCFD will certainly "disclose," but you may get many pounds of paper as a result but no analysis.
    http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs2010/464386/2009.pdf

    If it takes MCFD $100,000 simply to respond to a request to photocopy papers, imagine the work someone has to go through to actually read the material and extract the necessary information and produce a usable report. MCFD operates such an antiquated system and is able to deliberately frustrate the delivery of materials claiming it is spread out over many offices.

    I do agree over a 5-10 year period, perhaps some inroads may be made by RCY. Each Province has their own equivalent of an RCY, so it would be good to track the outcome of each office.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The UN is just another example of how people can be duped by the phrase "best interests of the child."

    All who are interested in learning about how the UN will affect parental rights should go to ParentalRights.org and read the articles on the UN.

    http://www.parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={30FF0076-5974-4B3C-B658-BBF7931E3EF8}

    Click, for example, on the article "Nannies in Blue Berets" and learn "Ten things you need to know about the structure of the CRC."

    How many organization get away with murder just because we get duped by them posing as child protectors!

    ReplyDelete
  7. It is off topic, but the commenter 8:08 PM makes very valid observations.

    See:
    http://parentalrights.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC={81C1F260-4A9F-4013-8164-68A360E295A5}

    The story about the daughter on drugs whose parents attempted to intervene and the girl was told to complain to CPS and they put her in foster care happened 30 years ago in the 80's.

    A variation of this happened to my kids just this year and I very nearly lost one child to the Ministry permanently. A foster mom and social worker attempted to bribe my legal-age child into agreeing to stay in care, and they even encouraged a call to RCY so that they would help facilitate this decision, to lend weight to the decision coming from the child not as a result of coercion.

    MCFD got authorization from the attorney general to hire an expensive down-town lawyer. I called CBC who agreed to publish the story. My child had a change of heart, and MCFD subsequently withdrew and gave my my kids back. The CBC story is on hold for the moment.

    This apparently is not uncommon, as another lawyer very familiar with MCFD tactics knew immediately who the legal specialist was before I said the name.

    The long and short of it is if your child can be convinced to essentially divorce themselves from their parents for whatever reason, the path exists right here and now.

    Any organization who purports to know better than parents what is good for them is indeed dangerous to a family unit. The problem arises where the excuse to intervene remains a subjective variable and where there is a fundamental lack of respect for a family hierarchy. The legal system is well accustomed to family breakups.

    Getting back to the subject of RCY, even this venerable institution can be misused. Children do not get to choose their new home, their foster parents or upbringing after placement. An exact same complaint a child might make against a foster parent as their own parent would fall on deaf ears.

    ReplyDelete

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