Without a self-applied recasting of the mission and method of the Ministry of Children, it is a matter of time until some commissioned body or individual delivers a blistering attack at the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It will be done with an informed and educated history which will not be dismissed.
 |
| blown glass wall tears by Esque |
When I began writing on behalf of the Bayne family, it was with naivety and some emotion and over time I have come to understand that while the writing exercise serves to release some steam, it will not ultimately affect change unless it is done well. So much rhetoric by angry citizens whose lives have been disrupted, lacks critical thinking and employs sweeping generalities. I recognize that discerning readers, officials and professionals refuse to listen to extreme expressions of even legitimate issues. I fully approve of bold spokespeople, yet what I believe is that if the MCFD is to be changed or a new Child Welfare system designed, it will require that advocates and champions be able to cooperatively envision and communicate a vision for what is right, fair, just and compassionate care of children and families and parents.
I do not for a moment discount the credibility of hundreds of parents who complain about the treatment they have encountered from social workers and the legal system. The MCFD in seeking to protect endangered children has been separating too many families and for too long periods of time.
Almost every square inch of the Earth's surface is soaked with the tears and blood of the innocent. Sometimes those innocents are children and sometimes they are parents. In most cases the tears fall for reasons much graver than an agency intervention and a removal of children. Nevertheless, the seizure of children on the suspicion of at-home risk is accountable for a good deal of wet soil because for both children and parents the weight of hopelessness and despair is unbearable.
Here on this blog we witness the pain of the afflicted.
The vast majority of parents have no clue how easy it is for them to lose their children. There are so many ways, and so many places, where they can lose their children.
ReplyDeleteA recent article regarding how a "Medical Unit for Abused Children Hits Snag" demonstrates how the public is continually persuaded to believe that children are continually at risk of child abuse, and how hospitals and those who work at hospitals are helping children, rather than destroying families.
Here is an excerpt from the article:
"...Dr. Jean Hlady, who has headed the child-abuse team at B.C. Children's Hospital since 1988, said recruiting difficulties are common.
"It's a national problem that not many doctors want to work in this area," she said.
Hlady said she has stayed in the field for so long because she believes in the work, and because she's part of a good team.
"No doctor can do this in isolation," she said.
"You need to have the support of a functioning team of other professionals, but also, ideally I would say, other physicians who can share some of the load and who you can discuss cases with."
Hlady said the work is "very difficult, because of the things that we see. It's one thing when you hear about it, it's another thing when you actually see a seriously injured child, and we have to go in and spend hours with that child and family.
"Sometimes there can be criminal charges. Sometimes children can be removed from their parents -- not just based on what we say, but they pay attention to what the physician says. So that is stressful."
There's also the strain of court proceedings, in which findings get challenged. "We would be cross-examined and so on, and that can be very difficult and has become increasingly difficult," Hlady said.
"I think that is one of the most stressful aspects of my work right now, and that frightens doctors off, I think."
Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/Medical+unit+abused+children+hits+snag/3751722/story.html#ixzz13sym0bzC
Readers should note at least two things in this excerpt:
1) Dr. Hlady notes that criminal charges are only done "sometimes" (and how often are these charges actually dismissed - she doesn't mention that of course).
2) Dr. Hlady notes that "There's also the strain of court proceedings, in which findings get challenged. 'We would be cross-examined and so on, and that can be very difficult and has become increasingly difficult..."
It is good to hear, however, that cross examination is in fact becoming increasingly difficult - maybe we have men with integrity such as Doug Christie to thank for this. Not to mention the writer of this blog.
Hlady is "famous" in child protection circles.
ReplyDeleteHlady was involved in my case more than ten years ago with allegations that were later proven unfounded in court. Ten years after, reference to these examinations were used out of context to lend weight to the removal of my children.
What this means is a large number of suspected abuse cases are funnelled through very few "protection" doctors. This should make it easier to file a freedom of information request and find out how many charges were recommended, how many failed, and the duration of children in care.