Monday, February 28, 2011

DELAYED AND DISAPPOINTED AGAIN / Part 461 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne


4:31 PM - Many of you have expressed yourself today. 3,700 hits to this page so far today. 204,300 hits to the site in total over 18 months. You are paying attention.   

10:00 PM - 4,200 hits. The increased awareness is only important as it carries the potential for inviting the legislator to launch policy review and inquiries into the quality of child protection of children in B.C.

TODAY IS THE DAY / Part 460 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

They have waited a long time

That is definite. Judge Thomas Crabtree, originally scheduled himself to deliver a ruling in December 2010, and then altered that to the end of February. He announced a couple of weeks ago that Feb 28 was the day. IT IS HERE. Paul and Zabeth learn whether their three children, Kent, Baden and Bethany will be returned to them after 3.5 years in foster care.

It is only a guess, perhaps a mid-morning announcement. When I hear, it will announced right here at this GPS site.

You can help right now by alerting every news source that you know to pay attention to this information today. Call them or email them to look here. Please take some time to read yesterday's entry and other backblogs.

Sunday, February 27, 2011

GET READY - TOMORROW IS COMING / Part 459 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.” Albert Pine

JUDGE THOMAS CRABTREE, Chief Justice of British Columbia will deliver his ruling to MCFD counsel Finn Jensen, and Bayne counsel Doug Christie tomorrow, Monday, February 28th. With Crabtree working on this for the past six months, one might expect that it is ready and that delivery will be made at 9:00 am. We will see.

For his own reasons, which are none of my business, Judge Crabtree indicated that the ruling would come via fax. Not the most convenient or practical format but still often used in business. For each receiving party to digitize the document will require that each page be scanned and compiled. I don't care personally, but it is time consuming and will delay its communication at least initially.

What is of importance is that we are going to know that Paul and Zabeth have their children returned to them. That's very optimistic isn't it. Naive? Time will tell. Will I rejoice, or will I be thrust into despair to complete my trip to political cynicism.

"Father in heaven, let Paul and Zabeth have their family back together to stay." A thousand Amens!

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #9 / Part 458 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

When Justice Kimberly Arthur-Leung was making clear to counsel Doug Christie what precisely she was in court to do with the case before her and how her intention differed from his objective which was to argue against the removal from Paul and Zabeth Bayne, of the newborn child, Josiah, she cited the Act, that is, the Child, Family and Community Services Act (CFCSA). 

She made the point that she was in court on this day for one purpose only and that related to the safety of the child Josiah Magnus Ider Bayne.

In other words, in spite of the fact that she did permit Mr. Christie to express himself on behalf of his clients, Mme Arthur-Leung was not really prepared to listen with a view to acting upon what he said. She was there simply to concur with the MCFD's concern about the child's safety without investigating the foundation or credibility of those concerns. Such examination would be for a different day. On this occasion she would facilitate this removal to insure a child's safety regardless of the validity of the claims against the parents. That's a bit overstated. I am at a lost to nuance her purpose. She would take the word of the social worker who acted for the director because that would seem the most certain route to child safety and it was certainly the easiest. It facilitated the processing of the over 100 cases listed outside the court room.  This was not the occasion for contest but for facilitation of the order needed to hold the child in care. Mr. Christie was expressing consternation over the fact that although the Act allows the Director without a court order, to remove a child if the director has reasonable grounds to believe that the child needs protection and that either the child's health or safety is in immediate danger, or there is no other less disruptive measure that is available to adequately protect the child, this did not apply to Josiah, the son of Paul and Zabeth Bayne. Josiah was a little over a week old when he was removed. He had been in supervised natal care in hospital. He was removed from the hospital. The reason for his removal was tantamount to a fabrication.

In fact, the affidavit stated that “the child was removed in accordance with the following: section 30 of the Child, Family and Community Service Act in the following circumstance(s) as described by section 13 of the Act: the child has been, or is likely to be, physically harmed by the child's parent, and the child's parent is unable or unwilling to care for the child and has not made adequate provision for the child's care. Further, the child was removed under section 30 because there was no less disruptive measures available to insure safety.Well, that's what the affidavit said, but it was not accurate.

I ask you, knowing what you now know about the Baynes, is that paragraph true?

The Baynes have made provision for their children. Their home has been ready for three and a half years to accommodate and to serve their children. Rooms, beds, closets, toys have all been in readiness and in fact, in use during Saturday visitations. Since Paul operates an evening janitorial business with numerous contracts, transporting the children to and from school or to appointments during the daytime would never be a problem. They are in readiness for newborn Josiah in every way as well. And, given the possibility of their startling reintroduction to caring for all of these children if Judge Crabtree grants that on Monday, they have a large network of trained professionals and volunteers who will assist. A care plan for the new child was submitted by the Baynes to MCFD, and Judge Arthur-Leung was shown this as well. To no avail. The baby remains for now in Ministry Care in a Foster Home, fortunately the same one where his siblings reside. He is in good hands there. I suppose Her Honour was effectively deferring to her superior, the Chief Justice Thomas Crabtree. He will tell us his verdict about Kent, Baden and Bethany on Monday, Feb 28th. The conclusion of Josiah's fresh saga is pending as well.

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Parents Disappointed Today

I know that you folk do care.
The beautiful day became a lonely day. Paul and Zabeth Bayne have experienced disappointment today and they are also concerned. Today was visitation day, six hours with all four children was the expectation. That's not the way it turned out.

You may know that Kent (eldest) was sick with flu all week. He's feeling better. Bethany was unable to come because she too was unwell although not yet feverish or vomiting. Today Baden developed a fever and the same flu symptoms during the visit and the supervisor had to take the children back to the foster home after only two hours.

While every effort may be used in the foster home to protect Josiah, Zabeth and Paul, because they feel so helpless, continue to be concerned about two week old Josiah also residing in this foster home because of the proximity to these flu germs. They know from prior experience that premature children have reduced immunity.

Tell our Representatives about the Baynes and other Troubled Families

Write a Letter to Members of the B.C. Legislative Assembly
Use either this email address list or the following photo gallery list with links for full contact information, EM, postal & phone.
MLA Alphabetical List with E-mail Addresses 

Write a Letter to a Member of Parliament of Canada

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #8/ Part 457 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Josiah, hours old and being bathed
Mr. Humeny is the social worker out of Hope, B.C. who has been associated with the Bayne case from its inception in 2007. Loren Humeny once again identified himself as the delegate of the director under section 92 of the Child, Family and Community Services Act, responsible for the written report (affidavit) which was submitted to the court as grounds for the apprehension of two week old Josiah Bayne. He cited as well the names of Kim Tran (MCFD social worker), Andrea Johnston, and Beth Preston (hospital social worker) and then Paul and Zabeth Bayne. Kim Tran is the Surrey social worker charged with the responsibility of removing Josiah from the hospital and placing him in the same foster home where his three siblings presently reside.

For his report Mr. Humeny did not present one reference that was immediately or directly applicable to the baby's relationship with his parents Paul and Zabeth during the two weeks of this baby's life. That is this affidavit contained nothing of substance that was new. Rather, risk was inferred, implied as inherent to the family situation in which the Baynes find themselves. It was this to which counsel Doug Christie took issue Thursday in a packed court room before Judge Kimberly Arthur-Leung. The entire two pages of the composition segment of the report referenced exclusively the details of the Ministry's active care dispute with the Baynes relative to their daughter's injuries in 2007 which the Baynes cited as accidental and a doctor assessed as shaken baby. It was on the basis of that unsubstantiated diagnosis that the two boys as well as the daughter were removed from the parents in 2007. The divide between Ministry and Paul and Zabeth has been widening throughout the 3.5 years that MCFD has retained the children and the parents have maintained their innocence of any wrongdoing.

Mr. Humeny's report then mentioned that during the course of the 2010 trial year, Zabeth became pregnant with their fourth child and the parents did not inform the Ministry. He cited as a negligence the fact that the Baynes did not report the pregnancy to MCFD. I fail to find a statute or regulation that requires this. Further, Mr. Humeny mentioned that the Baynes have refused to participate in a parental capacity assessment, yet to anyone's knowledge we have not in B.C. yet come to the place where one is required to pass a test to become a parent. He also wrote that before the pregnancy they refused to take advantage of support services offered by the Ministry, when in fact, no specific services which MCFD might have deemed to be beneficial to the Baynes was ever stipulated or offered. Mr. Humeny then stated that after the pregnancy, the Baynes refused to meet Ministry to collaborate about a plan for the safety and protection of the baby. He didn't point out that these entreaties were made during the closing weeks of her pregnancy when as in the previous three pregnancies, she was vulnerable to premature birth. He did not say that the continued overtures and threats of MCFD seizure of the child presented unnecessary stress upon Zabeth and that her advisors counselled her not to participate in such meetings that might induce that prematurity.

Paul holding his new son
He then wrote that the MCFD placed an alert on the province wide protection system with regard to the director's concerns and that he, Loren Humeny should be notified if a newborn was delivered by Zabeth Bayne. Royal Columbia Hospital confirmed that Josiah was born at 6:46 am on February 10th, 2011. Several hours later, Mr. Humeny, Kim Tran and Ms Preston disclosed to the Baynes that the baby would be removed as soon he was discharged from hospital.

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #7/ Part 456 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

This case with its complexities and inhumanities is being followed across the provinces of Canada.

CBC, Global, CTV and countless affiliate news agencies are waiting for the word from Judge Thomas Crabtree on Monday February 28th, for his ruling concerning the three children, Kent, Baden, and Bethany Bayne who have been in Ministry care for most of three and one half years since October 2007. That's most of the lives of the oldest two, and all of the youngest child's life.

In order to come to his decision he allowed himself six months which began at the conclusion of the trial proper in September after a year of court time spread sporadically across the months. Taking this amount of time, the speculation is that His Honour will do more than speak to the Bayne family status but as well, address the operations of a regional branch of child protection as it is administered by the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Or he may go beyond that to speak to the Child, Family and Community Services Act which propels so many social workers into the homes of B.C. families to interrupt them, fail to develop them, confuse them, render them broken and broke. If he were to do that, that would become headlines as large as the B.C. Rail Sale. To do that, Judge Crabtree would have to be one of the bravest men in B.C. public life. If he does this, he will inspire within the legal community an invigorated respect for honourable leadership. He is after all the new Chief Justice of British Columbia. If he does this, we may once again make a serious attempt to rectify the inflammatory and deconstructive aspects of the Act and the insensitivity of its delivery. There might be a hope for change. The new Liberal premier may recognize this important area of redress.

Yet getting back to the Bayne Family - Monday's decision, if it is the long anticipated restoration of their unity as a family, is now, only part of the solution. Their youngest, the two-week old, 4 lb baby boy named Josiah is presently in Ministry care, just as the others have been. It was unnecessary, particularly in view of the pending decision by Crabtree on Monday, for the Ministry to apprehend a 4 lb. Two week old baby. That was precisely Counsel Doug Christie's argument on Thursday when he pointed out to Judge Kimberly Arthur-Leung, that the affidavit in support of this most recent intake of a Bayne child was compiled not of something new to allege against the Baynes but rather all of the allegations used within an affidavit that had supported the Ministry's application for a Continuing Care Order for the three children. Those allegations have all been heard by Judge Crabtree and he rules upon them on Monday. The intake could have waited.The baby was safe in hospital.

Another post at 11:00 am

Information about making a donation to the Bayne Trust Fund here.

"There is no refuge from memory and remorse in this world. The spirits of our foolish deeds haunt us, with or without repentance."Gilbert Parker

Friday, February 25, 2011

BAYNE LEGAL DEFENCE FUND / Part 455 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

An Opportunity to Give  ( Some of you have been asking)

Dear Friends of Paul and Zabeth. As you read this posting perhaps you feel that you can become involved at another level.
Three Joint Trustees were appointed to set up and to manage a Bayne Trust Fund with a Chartered Bank, and the Fund is compliant with all legal requirements of Canada Revenue Agency and is governed in accordance with the law of the Province of British Columbia.
Their defence has been a costly one. While their lawyer was a gracious contributor of his time and skills, The Campaign for Love and for Justice has still incurred legal and related expenses for which the Baynes themselves have not had the resources. Can you help the Baynes with a financial donation?

Donations will be accepted by deposit to this trust account at any branch of TD Canada Trust.
TD Canada Trust [bank # 004]
Continental Centre Branch [branch # 9713]
Account Number [6415554]
Cheques should be made payable to: "Charter Lau, Kenny Chiu, Marvin Hunt In Trust For Paul and Zabeth Bayne" ; OR "Lau, Chiu, Hunt ITF Bayne"
Cheques can also be posted to
Lau, Chiu, Hunt in trust for Bayne
9406 Pauleshin Cres, Richmond, BC V7E 6P2
Thank you on behalf of Paul and Zabeth and their children,
Dr. Ron Unruh

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #5 / Part 454 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Many supporters were able to remain into the afternoon and in later afternoon, we found ourselves back in the courtroom, listening to a few other cases and only if these were dealt with would Mr. Christie be heard. That she would hear him at all was somewhat surprising, since Judge Arthur-Leung's parting words at noon were that this was not the time for a presentation hearing but only for determining another date in court.

The time now was 3:30 pm, and we listened and we watched the flow of lawyers in and out of the room, and then finally at 4:00 pm, the judge continued with the 'morning matter' as she termed it. Mr. Christie was given an opportunity to speak to the case, but not before the judge made sure he was perfectly clear that she would this was the proper jurisdiction for Josiah's case to be heard and that this was not the proper forum for a presentation hearing, and generally that he should understand that for her to be listening at all was a gracious gesture. He repeated the essence of what he had earlier stated and when once again he said that this was an abuse of process, she stepped in with what we realized were her summary remarks leading to a decision. She acknowledged that this an emotional, troubling case, but that she is authorized by a very unique Act, the Child, Family and Community Services Act where she is charged to be in that court for the best interests of the child. She cited Section 4 and stated that her duties are to insure the child's safety. She mentioned each of the sub-points. She said she is well versed and well aware of family law. She restated that she would not move the jurisdiction of this case because Josiah resides in Surrey. She would schedule another date at which time a further date for a presentation hearing would be agreed upon. And then she broke the news that came as a surprise to everyone, that Judge Thomas Crabtree would hear this and rule upon it. Then she set aside March 3rd as the date at which a hearing date would be determined.

One more installment today, at 5PM

Please read Ray Ferris' experienced, informed and insightful 2 part comment with this link. 

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #4 / Part 453 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

In the lobby following our early dismissal, the fifty or so supporters appeared willing to stay. Mr. Christie gathered into a large group so he could speak to us. This was an informal debriefing to make sure we understood what had just happened. The judge would call Mr. Christie back into the court room some time during the day. He would not know when. He simply had to hang out and be ready. He spoke to the supporters about the importance of their presence, their faces, their support. He stated that it speaks out that the public is very involved in the outcome of this case. These people, the public, pay the judge's salary, he siad. We have a right to hear the proceedings. If we cannot hear what is being said, then we should say so. We have a right to know what is going on. It can be assumed that Judge Arthur-Leung took note when 95% of observers left the room.

Mr. Christie re-entered the courtroom at 11:30 am and the 'public' dressed in black, the Bayne Train came with him. Again we packed the court room seats. We listened to several other cases handled speedily and then the judge permitted Mr. Christie to speak. This time Judge Arthur-Leung wanted to see Paul and Zabeth, so they stepped forward. Josiah's name was stated and spelled out 'Josiah Magnus Ider Bayne' and his birth-date, February 10th was given. Mr. Christie then sought to establish the quandary that occurs that an affidavit containing the identical material used in another case in another Registry (jurisdiction) could be used in this Registry when the prior case had already been heard by another judge (Judge Crabtree), and in fact was going to be ruled upon by him within four days, February 28th. Further Christie pointed out that there was nothing in this affidavit that alleges any misconduct by parents against Josiah. This should not even be heard and specially in this Registry. Her honour made it abundantly clear that this baby resided in Surrey and the case would be heard here and in that sense it was different from the other case where the three siblings were resident of Hope when the said allegations took place. Christie methodically but with some haste went through the Ministry's affidavit paragraph by paragraph while pointing out how irrelevant to Josiah all of this was as a justification for his apprehension. Christie underscored that the affidavit attests to using removal because there was no less intrusive means to protect this child but that this was patently false. The baby was premature, not weighing four pounds, and would have to remain in hospital for some time, at least until after Judge Crabtree had delivered his ruling on the worthiness of the parents to parent the other three children, a verdict which profoundly speaks to this case. Then he pointed out that the Baynes had presented a parenting plan to MCFD which is not even a requirement in this province to be a parent. He mentioned the huge network of support within community that they have. He said this removal should not have happened. There was no basis for apprehension. This is an abuse of process.

Then shortly before noon, the judge indicated that instead of getting back into this case, she was going to give the staff their deserved break and she would return at 1:30 pm, but again she made it clear she would not attend to this item until she cleared her morning list of cases.

There's more at 2:00 pm

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #3/ Part 452 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Yesterday Paul and Zabeth Bayne were in court again as they were last Thursday, and it was again to deal with the apprehension of their youngest child, Josiah who yesterday was 2 weeks old. Ministry of Children took custody of him on the day of his birth, February 10th, five hours after his mother welcomed him into the air-breathing world. Last Thursday, the social worker who wrote the supporting affidavit did not appear in court. Neither did MCFD lawyer Finn Jensen, although it appears he requested the assistance of a Surrey based lawyer to represent the matter. The Judge chose to adjourn the case until yesterday. Yesterday Judge Kimberley Arthur-Leung presided. Ms. Arthur-Leung was appointed to the bench of the British Columbia Provincial Court in the Lower Mainland and took her seat effective March 31. 2008. She has a distinguished career working in private practice in family and civil law since being called to the British Columbia bar in 1989, and has been active in assorted community activities in Delta and in 2004 was recognized with a BC Achievement Foundation Award. She is unquestionably qualified to hear cases such as this one.

I mentioned in a post yesterday that her court room schedule that day contained perhaps 100 cases about which she was required to make some judgement or set some date. It is customary that the majority of these take less than ten minutes. The Bayne case was listed about third. When it became apparent that Doug Christie, counsel for the Baynes intended to contest the apprehension of the baby, this did not fit in with her perceived mandate or schedule for the day. Such a contest usually takes place at a presentation hearing. MCFD desired merely the customary judicial approval of an order to apprehend Josiah, which MCFD had already affected two weeks earlier.

When she allowed Mr. Christie to introduce himself and make a statement, he immediately expressed to Her Honour that the affidavit supporting the apprehension was filled with the same allegations against Paul and Zabeth, allegations which were already the subject of another case. The other case of course being that which required a year of time to conduct and over which another judge had been presiding. In fact, Christie pointed out that Judge Crabtree by virtue of a letter, a copy of which was handed to Judge Arthur-Leung, was going to deliver his ruling on that case this coming Monday, February 28th. Most importantly, those allegations had nothing to do with Josiah, and further the new affidavit contained nothing new in respect to Paul and Zabeth and their relationship with Josiah. And Mr. Christie said this is nothing less than an abuse of process. At that point, ten minutes after we began, Judge Arthur-Leung said that if this was going to be contested, it would not be now. She would stand it down. As she looked at a courtroom packed with people, she assumed that the benches were filled with people related to the many cases on her schedule. She announced that if she will hear any more of this case today, it would be after the other cases had been heard because it wouldn't be fair to all these parties to have to wait through a long contest over this removal which had not been scheduled as a hearing of this kind. She told Christie to leave. With that, the entire court room of spectators all dressed in black, quietly and respectfully filed out into the expansive lobby. That was a statement. This is an important case. This is not the usual expedite-it-quickly case.

More to come at 11:00 AM

Look for Installment #3 at 8:00 am

Thursday, February 24, 2011

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #2/ Part 451 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Here is the Bottom Line.
With regard to the recent apprehension of their newborn son Josiah, Paul and Zabeth Bayne will be back in court on March 3rd.

No one said this would be easy. We know how long these legal tangles take to unravel. So we are going to know whether Josiah's three siblings are back with their mommy and daddy before we can do anything more for Josiah.

If you don't know anything about this case, quickly glance to your right and read the summary in that column.

Here is the deal. On Monday February 28th, perhaps by 9:00 AM or so, Judge Crabtree will have sent via fax, his ruling concerning Kent, Baden and Bethany, to both the Bayne legal counsel, Mr. Doug Christie, and to the MCFD legal counsel, Mr. Finn Jensen. As soon as this is sent to me you too will hear what that is.

Judge Arthur/Leung was determined not to hear a presentation as per a presentation hearing but she did grant Doug Christie some time to make his statements which I will later detail a bit more. She was there merely to process the order application to ratify the MCFD apprehension of baby Josiah. These matters usually are uncontested and take a couple of minutes. The Judge discerned quickly that Doug Christie was unwilling to allow this process which he believes to be an abuse, to proceed without Her Honour knowing his reasons. Fortunately she permitted him to speak. (More to come)

At the end of the afternoon, however, the Judge ruled that because of the baby's residential address, this is the Registry where this baby's case will be heard. She will not send it to another Registry. Further, at the March 3rd date, it will only be to set the date for a Presentation Hearing. This approach suggests this could be a prolonged waste of time and money once again. However, because of the insistence by Doug Christie that the rationale for seizing the baby was the identical explanation for the CCO (Continuing Care Order) concerning the other three children, and because Judge Crabtree has been listening to that and processing it for one year, and because he will deliver his ruling this coming Monday the 28th of February, Judge Arthur/Leung, probably through consultation with Judge Crabtree during breaks in the day, ruled that Crabtree will preside at the March 3rd date and further hear this case concerning Josiah.

It remains possible, even hopeful that Judge Crabtree in delivering his Monday ruling about the three children will speak to Josiah's seizure too. He could make it clear that in awarding the children back to Paul and Zabeth, he is discounting any merit to the MCFD allegations concerning the Baynes harming the children, or the Baynes' inability to protect and to care for the children, and therefore there is no foundation for any action concerning Josiah. That would be ideal.

More about today later, and more about the possibilities of Monday's ruling.

THURSDAY-COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #1/ Part 450 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

COURTROOM REPORT - Installment #1

It's 12:00 PM and we have a lunch break until 1:30 PM. When we return, the Judge has already told us that she will not revisit the Bayne case immediately, but if at the end of the day there is time then she will hear it.

Outside the courtroom is a list of the cases that Judge Arthur/Leung is hearing today. There may be 100 or more cases. There are expeditiously processed with very little time spent on each one. That is anticipated. The Bayne case was second or third on the list. We began close to 9:30 am. By “we' I mean at least 50 Bayne supporters all wearing black. The Judge, upon entering, could not have known we were all with Paul and Zabeth. She assumed we were there for one of the many cases scheduled during the morning hours. She expected as well that all these cases would simply move smoothly along without contest.

We were not in the court room very long. The Judge sent us out. That's right, sent Lawyer Doug Christie and the Baynes and all supporters out at around 9:55 am. This is the way it happened. A young confident lawyer introduced the Ministry case to the Judge, as well as Kim Tran, social worker who removed Josiah from Hospital. Doug Christie introduced himself and was permitted to speak to the matter. It became immediately clear to the Judge that he was contesting the facts that the case concerning Josiah was before a court in a different registry from the one where the prior case concerning the three siblings was heard, when in fact, the presenting reasons for this child's removal were the identical material heard by Judge Crabtree with regard to the three siblings.

Judge Arthur/Leung said she was not prepared to listen to this case if it was going to be contested because there were many cases to be dealt with today and her court room was packed, and of course she didn't want all of these people having to wait to listen to the one Bayne case. So she dismissed us. The entire observer gallery stood and walked out. That was a bit of a surprise to the court I am sure. But also an indication of the public awareness and the network of support behind these parents. We all waited outside the court room.

At 11:30 AM we were permitted to come back inside. Doug Christie presented the Judge with a letter from Judge Crabtree that informed the court that Crabtree would deliver this coming Monday, his ruling concerning the three. In was a current matter soon to be settled. Christie pointed out that there was no new or different evidence presented in this new affidavit to justify taking the baby Josiah. He went through the Ministry affidavit paragraph by paragraph to emphasize that everything has already been heard by Judge Crabtree because all of it relates to the case concerning the three siblings, not this newborn child. He questioned how a Judge could be expected to rule upon such content when it was already heard and being deliberated upon by another Judge, and not just any judge but this judge's boss, the Chief Justice. Christie contested that in fact MCFD did not use a less intrusive means of protecting Josiah, which clearly would have been to leave him in hospital since his weight is 4 lbs. without an adequate immune system, but instead, Ministry has taken him outside in a car seat, placed him in a foster home where one of the other children has severe cold/flu symptoms. And why? Not for any justifiable reason that pertains to the parents with Josiah, but wholly because of MCFD's dealings with the parents concerning the other three children.

Okay, well back to the court house... stay tuned. I am not confident I will be happy with the outcome today.

A DECISION DAY FOR JOSIAH / Part 449 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

I am heading to the Surrey Provincial Court Building now.
I am trusting that Paul's and Zabeth's legal counsel, Mr. Doug Christie, was able to come through the snow from Vancouver Island. I will also learn whether the hearing will be before Judge Crabtree or someone else.

The affidavit prepared by the MCFD will be ruled upon today. Among other reasons for this order request, MCFD has used Section 30 of the Child, Family and Community Services Act, as described in section 13, and said that the child has been, or is likely to be, physically harmed by the child's parent. Further, that the child's parent is unable or unwilling to care for the child and has not made adequate provision for the child's care. I cannot underscore how absurd, how inaccurate, how unacceptable those statements are with respect to the Baynes.

I have seen the Bayne home, the children's rooms and beds and belongings. These are the places where they spend time, six hours on Saturdays during visitation. The observant supervisor can attest to the competent fashion in which Paul and Zabeth provide for and care for their children. Can they do that 24/7? Well, how can MCFD know when they have withheld the children for 3.5 years. Can the Baynes take on the responsibility of a new baby as well as his three siblings? We will see on Monday whether Judge Crabtree believes that MCFD has erred in its management of this three year old case and will deliver a family of six from a nightmare. Meanwhile, we must still listen to the disputation concerning the immediate custody of a two week old boy – Josiah.

I am absolutely convinced that these children will be nurtured into a happy and healthy childhood, youth and adulthood.

a sample of people in black
From what is rumoured, there will be a large support base for the Baynes and they will be wearing black. I can hardly wait until Monday, when I promise you, the black will be shed for a lustrous yellow.

I will talk to you later today.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011


5,200 readers the last two days, 13,000 during the past 6 days.

TOMORROW IS COURT DAY AGAIN / Part 448 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

The court order hearing sought by the Ministry to take custody of then 14 day old Josiah, is scheduled for Thursday, February 24th at 9:30 am at the Surrey Provincial Court. BUT THEY HAVE ALREADY REMOVED THE BABY FROM HOSPITAL AND PLACED HIM WITH FOSTER PARENTS. YESTERDAY WAS PAINFUL FOR THE BAYNES IN MEETING WITH PEDIATRICIAN ETC.

Daddy Paul and Josiah
The author of the supporting affidavit for the custody of Josiah is the same social worker, Loren Humeny, who has been charged with responsibility for this case for the past three and one half years. He was delegated by the Director last year to write the affidavit that reasoned for the continued care order for Josiah's three older siblings. We have an unconfirmed hint that this week Judge Crabtree who oversaw the trial will be hearing this one too. He has heard before, everything that is contained within the newest affidavit. He doesn't have to hear it again. However, if the forecasted snow doesn't stop Doug Christie, the presiding judge can expect to hear from Doug, who will unquestionably make it clear that there is no new evidence. Certainly none that pertains to Josiah.

Read my words. NO NEW EVIDENCE. Josiah will be 14 days old tomorrow. He was only seven days old last Thursday when the affidavit was scheduled to be ruled upon by another judge. It should be assumed that it was penned some hours/days before that. During that first week of the child's life there would have been little opportunity for contact between parents and child and whatever contact there was, occurred within the careful view of attendant hospital staff. There is no evidence that concerns Josiah that Mr. Humeny can present in support of this order. If in fact Judge Crabtree is presiding tomorrow, it will be most interesting to hear what he does with this order application. Will he grant the custody order based upon that affidavit information? If he does, should the MCFD assume that he will similarly rule in its favour concerning the other three children on Monday? Will he himself decide that the ruling concerning Josiah will be rolled into his ruling concerning the three children, since the supporting evidence is identical? Numerous spin-off questions come to mind, too many to cite here.

Zabeth and her new baby
On Mr. McNeill's behalf, Loren must rely upon the same supportive material used for the CCO case for the three siblings. Yes, that's correct. The 'stuff' upon which the judge is expected to rule on Thursday with respect to Josiah is the same 'stuff' upon which Judge Thomas Crabtree will rule no later than Monday, the 28th, four days later with respect to the other three children. That's the substance of the MCFD allegation that Paul and/or Zabeth are a risk to their children. It is no surprise that the judge last week in adjourning the hearing for a week when MCFD lawyer Finn Jensen and social worker Loren Humeny did not make an appearance, said that the Josiah hearing should be heard by Judge Crabtree. And now we understand Judge Crabtree will be present. Well we hope that may be the case. Certainly no other judge would presume to rule on the same material upon which the Chief Justice of B.C. will rule days later (28th). Judge Crabtree has been deliberating for the past six months. In any case, what mysterious strategy it is to press forward with the order application for Josiah when the Chief Justice may make a landmark decision that explodes the CCO application and Shaken Baby Syndrome and MCFD practice concerning 'the Bayne Three' which will render irrelevant the affidavit concerning Josiah. The wisest course for MCFD would have been to posture for another adjournment tomorrow but instead they took the child and here we are. Perhaps Judge Crabtree will see through the legal devices and will make the Baynes and the children wait even longer for a ruling, but I doubt that. He is very sensitive to the hardship created for the Baynes by this tedious process.

Do you want to know what was going on at the hospital nursery these past few days? Do you wish to know what the hospital staff were witnessing? Josiah was doing very well. He fed well and he had regained weight to his birth weight. He responded to Zabeth's and Paul's voices, and to the sound of his daddy’s voice when he sang softly to him. Staff noticed that Zabeth and Paul were the only parents who remained all day to hold and to feed their baby boy. They saw Paul leave in order to attend to his evening work contracts. They saw two parents who enjoy every moment with their child, the way he smells, the way his tiny whimper sounds. They saw parents whose hearts rejoiced when Josiah looked up at them. And this loving care took place while the threat of his removal hung like a pall upon them. Then yesterday, someone was authorized to try fitting him into a car seat, to be ready for eventual transportation and at 2 PM Kim Tran, Surrey social worker, removed him from the hospital. This was done even though Josiah's tiny 4 pound form had to be stuffed round with filler material for him to be restrained within the car seat straps. Did you know that his ability to endure the car seat travel mode was tested, for  up to an hour and his responses monitored. Did you know that the hospital pediatrician who met with the Baynes and approved Josiah's readiness to be moved, is a colleague of Dr. Margaret Colbourne who diagnosed SBS in 2007. Don't know what if anything that indicates. It's just that the lower mainland is a virtual citadel of SBS proponents.

Oh, by the way, Judge Crabtree knows the outrageous action that took place on Thursday February 10th. I surmise that Mr. Humeny stated in the new affidavit that the child was removed under the authority of the CFCSA because the Director had valid reason to believe the child needed protection.  That would be standard. And if as I suspect Mr. Humeny marked the box with an X that indicates that there was no less disruptive protective measure available, that could be regarded as not wholly true? The less disruptive measure was in his face on the 10th. As soon as he knew that due to Josiah's prematurity the baby had to stay in hospital for two weeks, that of itself was the less disruptive measure for protecting the child, don't you think? That is, unless Paul and Zabeth are psychopaths. Therefore when Mr. Humeny drafted the affidavit he did know that this less disruptive option of simply waiting for two weeks was available. We must conclude that the Director and the social worker were determined to hurry to seize the child, even though the latter could say, "I am only following orders." So, considering the larger MCFD entity rather than the Fraser Valley Region, it really was in MCFD's best interest to hold back on Josiah's custody order and forego tomorrow's hearing and simply wait for D-day on Monday, but again, here we are. Oh sure, because of that cute tactical manoeuvre, that is, two weeks have now passed because the MCFD team was a no-show in court, so of course, there is no less disruptive protection measure. 

As I have earlier pointed out, it won't matter whether Finn Jensen himself or a substitute counsel is present for the MCFD on Thursday, since the MCFD counsel will have to point out to Judge Crabtree or another judge,  everything that was earlier heard by Judge Crabtree over several weeks that spread over all of 2010. It is all the same. There is nothing new. I can't imagine how Judge Crabtree or another his/her honour will process this but even if the ruling concerning Josiah tomorrow is to grant MCFD the order, it may be obliterated within hours by the Crabtree decision when he rules on Monday.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

BULLETIN: JOSIAH HAS BEEN MOVED / Part 447 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Few details as yet. First, a hasty note came that someone had been in hospital trying to fit tiny Josiah into a child carseat. Second, word has come that Josiah will be moved from hospital today into a foster home.
Latest: They did remove the baby. They hurt Paul and Zabeth even more. 
Josiah: he is now 12 days old
The Baynes have written: "The MCFD has taken our baby today. They refused to wait for Judge Crabtree's decision. He is now in foster care. There was a meeting between the pediatrician, MCFD, the hospital social worker and his nurse for today and us. He is so small and fragile. Please pray for his safety and return. Our hearts are enduring more pain than we ever thought we would have to bear."

LETTER TO THE MCFD / Part 446 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

An Open and Public Online Letter to Bruce McNeil (Director), Loren Humeny (Social Worker), Finn Jensen (Legal Counsel), and Leslie du Toit (Deputy Minister)

Bruce, Loren, what are you doing?

This is the newborn baby boy who was to be the subject of yet another apprehension on February 10th. That was your plan. This is Josiah.  But he was only hours old. He was premature. To think that you actually ordered the apprehension and naively expected to remove the child into foster care that day in his premature state and with all his needs, is revealing in the extreme. 

His ecstatic parents had almost no time to enjoy his delightful arrival or for Zabeth, time to recover, before your calculated plan kicked in. But the incompetence inherent in the timing and the delivery of this agenda is what the public and the news media are reading and upon which they are forming opinions about your work and about MCFD Child Protection. Finn, how can you let them do this?

Leslie, are you really discussing this with your staff. You must. This is very bad practice happening here. It is not good and does not appear good. Of course, Jensen knows that McNeill and Humeny are within their rights to be doing what they are doing, but they have transgressed the boundaries of decency. When will you care enough to stop this? When Global or CTV 6 o'clock news start talking about it? That may come.

Of course Bruce, Loren, you couldn't affect the plan because medical professionals demanded that the child remain in hospital for some considerable time.You had information about Zabeth's condition and the baby's, and you could have anticipated his condition at birth. Nonetheless, you still took custody of Josiah in an official sense but needed to have an order approved by a judge, and that of course was to be heard and ruled last Thursday the 17th wasn't it? Covering one's tracks is readily apparent to most observant people so when legal counsel and social worker (chief testimony) didn't show up for court, the judge had little option but to grant a postponement. So this Thursday the 24th we are to hear what you propose to justify the insult to public conscience. Everyone knows that it was unnecessary to rush to an apprehension order for an infant who could not leave the hospital. Everyone knows how fundamentally wrong and ill advised it is for you to presume to approve or disapprove the use of a mother's breast milk for the feeding of her baby. Everyone knows that these hands should not be separated, or this tiny hand should not be placed into a foster mother's hand. It is time that your business demonstrates compassion and mercy and love.

Please, please begin today to retrace this most recent action and drop this process and simply wait for the ruling by Judge Crabtree, which will decide finally, one way or another, your involvement in the futures of four small children, three of whom love their mommy and daddy and rightfully so. Josiah will in time also know how much he is loved and will fulfill the meaning of his name for the Bayne family and others - "Jehovah has healed." Paul and Zabeth whom you have failed to get to know or to understand, are good and decent people and capable parents.

Dr. Ron Unruh

Monday, February 21, 2011


Take a peek at Josiah, so small and needy of his parents, tiny hand curling around his mother's finger, lovingly held in his daddy's and mommy's arms.   the link is to an album.

Don't miss Ray Ferris' three part Comment today attached to the previous Blog Post, # 445.  Ferris Part 1, Ferris Part 2,   Ferris Part 3

HOW YOU CAN HELP / Part 445 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

How you can help. Advocate Miriam Hill has provided me with a formula for assisting the Baynes in the short term and then for increasing awareness of the need for a true reformation of child and family development and care in this province in the long term. She has suggested Levels of activities and even bracketed the amount of effort required to accomplish these.

Level 1 (Easy/Minimal Effort)
  1.   As part of your email signature tag line, include "I support the Bayne Campaign for Justice. You can too. Check the daily for updates"
  2.   Write a Letter to 3 friends/family who you feel would share your concerns for the Baynes and invite them to be supportive by also doing some of the actions provided here.
  3.   Provide Financial Support for the Baynes' legal expenses - cheques made out to Lau, Chiu, Hunt in Trust for Bayne, 9406 Pauleshin Cres, Richmond, BC V7E 6P2.
  4.   Stay informed by daily visiting the primary support Blog at
  5.   If faith is important to you, Pray.

Level 2 (Moderate Effort/ 1/2 hour)
  1.   Write letters to municipal, provincial and national leaders. For a comprehensive list of potential recipients, see below.
  2.   Write local, provincial and national media groups to request that they consider covering the Bayne family story.
  3.   Visit or phone your local MLA. Go to for a list of MLA's.
  4.   Post notices at your local
    1.   schools
    2.   grocery store
    3.   church
    4.   community organization
    5.   condo/tenant meeting area
  5.   Churches or other Group settings - present the Bayne story to leadership and group members providing information.
Level 3 (Intermediate Effort/3 hours)
  1.   Visit the courthouse whenever the Bayne family has a court appearance. The next appearance is this Thursday Feb 24th at 9:30am at the Surrey Courthouse (see below for more details).
  2.   Dress in the colour black in support of the Baynes. Consider printing "We Support the Baynes" (T-shirt transfer sheets cost ~$2 at Staples) onto a black shirt. (sample: shows a colour for each child with a caption. Click the image, enlarge and print a copy.)
  3.   Contact local school, family, church, and social justice organizations to make them aware of the Bayne Family plight.
  4.   Post a sign in your front yard or window "We Support The Baynes"
Level 4 (More Difficult/Requires effort)
  1.   Arrange for a group of friends (3 or more) to do a sit-in or protest at your local MLA's office. Don't forget to post the details on Facebook at "The Baynes Campaign For Justice" so that others might join you if they are available.
  2.   Wear Black Days - arrange for a large group to wear black for 3 1/2 days (to symbolize the 3 1/2 years the Bayne children have been in MCFD custody)
  3.   Celebrity Involvement - do you know a local celebrity? Arrange for them to contribute their name at a fundraising event or to contribute a gift that would publicly support the Baynes family.
Surrey Provincial Family Court is located at 14340 - 57 Avenue, Surrey, B.C.  
Parking is available underground but is limited, so you will want to arrive early. There will be a list of court cases and rooms as you first enter the building. You can be seated quietly and respectfully inside the courtroom or wait outside the courtroom until their case is called. It is essential that supporters be respectful of the court staff and others. When the Baynes' case is dismissed, exit the courtroom quickly, quietly and in an orderly manner. We will have succeeded in supporting the Baynes' family if the judge recognizes that support for this case is growing, not diminishing.

Sample Letter to Family and Friends
Following is a copy of a letter submitted by a Bayne family supporter. It is essential that you do not copy and paste this letter if you are submitting it in protest to government officials or media outlets as form letters are not effective. Use the data and convey your own perspective. You may do well to condense and shorten the compostion.

Three and a half years ago, the Baynes had two young sons, and a baby girl was born prematurley. Subsequent to the impact of an accidental fall of one of the older children upon the baby, the Baynes noticed that her eating and sleeping patterns had changed drastically and they were concerned enough to take her to hospital. In fact over the next many hours they visited several hospitals and clinics as her condition failed to improve and adequate diagnosis was not made. Finally, at Children’s Hospital an examining doctor (mis)diagnosed Shaken Baby Syndrome.

Immediately this baby was removed from this family’s care. In addition the two boys were also seized from the parental home. RCMP conducted an investigation and found that there was no substance for charges. Much later the boys were placed for a time with maternal grandparents. The Baynes appealed to the media to get their baby girl back. The segment was to be aired later. Meanwhile a social worker met with them and inferred that the baby might be returned to them soon. Then the TV interview aired and the MCFD swooped in and seized the two boys once again.   Over the last three and a half years this family has spent all of their money and time going to multiple specialists who have all agreed that the initial diagnosis by the Children’s Hospital doctor was incorrect – that these symptoms do not match Shaken Baby Syndrome and are consistent with the Baynes version of events. The injury was related to the baby's under-developed skull being struck during the tripping incident. The Ministry of Children and Family Development has not attempted to get a second medical opinion nor returned their children. Instead MCFD has tried to reduce their visitations claiming they that the visits with the children are interfering with their social activities. The Judge however has not agreed and has even allowed visits within the Bayne home. Multiple delays by the Ministry have resulted in a three and a half year removal of their children - all for a crime they cannot prove.   The latest development in the name of protection demonstrates a level of cruelty. Last week the Baynes family enjoyed the birth of a brand new baby born at less than 4 lbs. He must remain in the hospital for weeks. Instead of waiting for this baby to be ready to be removed from hospital, the MCFD moved within three hours to remove him from the parents. Clearly this baby was to be in the care of the hospital for weeks to come and is there now. Further, MCDS refuses to even allow the baby to drink expressed breast milk, which no one denies is what is best for him. At the last hearing held Thursday, February 17th, the Ministry's lawyer and the case Social Worker did not appear in court but rather applied for yet another postponement. As a citizen of British Columbia, whom they are supposed to be representing, I am outraged and alarmed and fearful for those to whom this might happen next. The Bayne family are good, decent and pleasant people. They themselves never expected this could happen to them.   I have sent this to you with the belief that you may feel as I do, that injustice has been done here.

If you are interested in investigating this further, please go to the primary information site, or the Facebook page called Bayne Campaign for Justice. Please consider supporting the Baynes family.

Sunday, February 20, 2011

Ray Ferris Promises an Interesting Comment tomorrow

Ray Ferris said...
Chris Ash gave the standard MCF blurb in reply which is on a card written for her by Leslie Dutoit. She dare not deviate from it under pain of having her blackberry removed.
She should ask permission to change her spiel as follows. When a social worker has good reason to believe that a child is at risk,he/she must ensure the safety of that child and is legally obliged to ensure that no less disruptive course is available. They must swear before a judge that such a course was taken. I can give you every assurance that I have looked closely into the case and every effort was made to ensure that the worker complied strictly with this legal requirement.
Of course the affidavit of Humeny contained a check off that no less disruptive course was available. This was a bald faced lie. All he had to do was nothing. I had suggested to Doug Chistie that if Humeny turned up with that affidavit, he should immediately accuse him of perjury. NO wonder they adjourned.
Tomorrow I am going to write about why I am convinced that the judge cannot make a continuing care order on the BAyne case.

Meantime I beg Humeny to be as decent as possible until the judge rules. Stop trying to interfere with poor Zabeth feeding her child mother's milk. Just try to do the decent thing and stand up to your boss if you have to.

Readership Stats for GPS / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Readership is increasing all of the time.
  • 5,000 Readers the past four days and into the weekend. Broadcasters, columnists and news networks are looking in. 
  • MCFD staff are regularly checking. 
  • So far this month, 10,117 hits. It's only the 20th of February.
  • A total of 182,305 looks since October 2009.

Baby Seized by MCFD Hours after Birth / Part 444 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Tim Amey is the News Director at 895 The Hawk, Chilliwack's Newest Rock Station, and recently wrote a piece in which Zabeth expressed herself and Paul's and Zabeth's legal counsel, Doug Christie, answered questions following the recent apprehension of the Baynes' five hour old son. I would like you to read it. It is pasted here in its entirety and you can reference it at the My Chilliwack News .com blog as well.

Hope Couple's Baby Seized by MCFD Hours after Birth

By Tim Amey
Monday, February 14, 2011 05:00 AM

Chilliwack, B.C. - Paul and Zabeth Bayne say they are completely devastated. At 6:30am last Thursday morning Zabeth gave birth to a baby boy. By noon the same day a Social Worker from Hope was telling them it was going into Foster Care.

The Bayne's three other kids have been in the care of Ministry of Children and Family Development since September 2007. It was after what they say was a misdiagnosed case of shaken baby syndrome on their then infant daughter.

Zabeth says she was just out of delivery, waiting for a private room when she was approached by a social worker. “I asked that they wait. You know I’m exhausted, I just delivered. And it wasn’t a good time and if they could just come back in the evening or if they could come back tomorrow.” They didn’t.

She says their newborn was premature and needs to bond and nurse. The baby is still in the hospital and Zabeth has been sent home. Needless to say she's completely crushed.

Their lawyer Doug Christie isn't crushed, he's angry. He says this never should have happened. Christie says they are waiting on a final decision from the judge on whether the first three kids can be returned. He's even sent the judge a letter asking that he speed up his decision. He says if a decision had come down by now, the newborn never would have been seized.

Christie says the Ministry of Children and Family Development does this kind of thing all the time. “What I have seen the Ministry do, as in many cases, has been totally irrational to me and cruel to parents and children. I have very little regard for the Ministry’s actions.” However he has never seen a newborn seized in his 40 years of legal practice.

Hawk News contacted the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and got this reply:
Got your media request re. MCFD process on child apprehensions – also, if you are asking about the Baynes case, we can’t comment due to privacy concerns and the fact this matter is before the courts.

That said, the safety and well being of any child is the ministry’s first priority and the first step to any child protection case is to assess and investigate if the child is in need of protection. If it is deemed that a child needs protection, MCFD, through its legislation, must go before the courts within seven days, where a Judge will determine if a child is in need of protection. The Judge would then make a decision whether a child would remain in Ministry care or be returned to the parent.
Chris Ash, Manager, PAB, Ministry of Children & Family Development

Saturday, February 19, 2011

IF YOU LOVE YOUR CHILDREN / Part 444 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

To Anonymous February 17, 2011 11:59 AM who inferred some failed responsibility by Zabeth because of Josiah's small size and weight …. and implied awareness of nutritional neglect for at least the two oldest boys when the Baynes did have custody three years ago, I suggest that you have made a presumptive judgement that the boys' appearance to you back then is synonymous with deficiency of care. As to Josiah, it should interest you to know that Zabeth had an enfarcted placenta and a two vessel umbilical cord. Apparently the two vessel cord is common and associated with small babies and the placenta was associated with high blood pressure which she started to have mid pregnancy.
Umbilical cord abnormalities can be detected ultrasonographically and may be associated with fetal anomalies, chromosome abnormalities, and potential complications during pregnancy. The normal umbilical cord contains 2 arteries and 1 vein. The umbilical vein carries oxygenated blood from the placenta to the left portal vein in the fetal liver. The 2 umbilical arteries are continuous with the internal iliac arteries and carry deoxygenated blood from the fetus to the placenta. The most common abnormality of the umbilical cord is a single umbilical artery (SUA), which occurs in 0.5% to 2.5% of pregnancies. This finding is sometimes referred to as a 2-vessel cord. The loss of 1 umbilical artery likely occurs secondary to thrombotic atrophy of a previously normal artery. Less likely, the loss may result from primary agenesis of the artery. It is the left umbilical artery that is more commonly absent. The clinical significance of an SUA is not completely understood, and there are many different reports regarding outcomes of fetuses with this finding.

The term infarct usually signifies an area of dead tissue. Extensive placental infarcts are sometimes present in stillbirths and in instances of premature separation of the placenta from its implantation site in the wall of the uterus.
Notwithstanding, the Social Worker marched into the hospital uninformed, not asking necessary questions, and expected to seize the newborn several hours old and place him in the care of a foster parent. This is the circus atmosphere in which the MCFD Fraser Valley group have operated throughout a three year ordeal with this family. And they have done so by relying upon uniformed and bogus reports such as the implications you have made.
Zabeth was in a wheelchair some of the time to avoid premature delivery when she needed to get around, but she took care of herself, she ate well, and she was under the care of an OB every two weeks and often more frequently than that. She was extremely conscientious about caring for herself and her baby.
Anonymous, here is what you wrote. I include it here so others may know why I answered this way.
“Why was this baby born near his due date so small? This mother knows she is at risk of premature labor which luckily in Josiah's case didnt happen. Wouldn't this mother be doing all she could do to give birth to a healthy baby boy? Vitamins, supplements, healthy food etc. 3 lbs and 2 weeks early? Why? Why when in the care of their parents were these children so unhealthy? Regardless of whats going on, these are facts. Why have all 4 children presented early on as being underweight and why when they entered care did they start to gain weight and become healthier? ( I know you have an argument for that but poor record keeping on both sides is likely to blame) There is so much more to this than innocent parents claiming they did no wrong. Premature or not, 3 years ago those were some very unhealthy looking little people! That's poor parenting. If you love your children, whether you are naive or new to parenting there is soooo much info out there, ignorance is not an excuse! If they cant provide a healthy life for their kids then they shouldn’t have them! Healthy eating is not too much to ask and it isn’t excusable.”

Only the Beginning / Part 443 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Only the Beginning
First breath and Josiah soon is in the arms of his mother. It is a beginning. It signals a new beginning perhaps for Paul and Zabeth. That was one week ago. Three children they have already and all are registered by name as Bayne Children, yet they have not lived with their mom and dad for three years. This new child and his new life however is the herald of a new start for the Bayne family. No, no, that's not the way it works. Not according to the child protection recipe followed by MCFD in British Columbia. If MCFD regards Paul and Zabeth as a risk to their three children, even though every visit several hours each week only confirms that these children love their parents and want to be with them, then it must be assumed that Paul and Zabeth cannot be trusted to care responsibly for Josiah. Consequently, within hours of his emergence, Josiah may no longer look to his mother for warmth and caress and nourishment and rest, for he has been subsumed among the properties of a social service agency that engenders more apprehension than consolation during the past decades. The confessions of so many of you attest that the Baynes are not an isolated case.

Yet possibly, Josiah's birth and capture is only the beginning and will serve in the near future to give rise to a new beginning. The public cannot for much longer be expected to accept such invasive action against children and their parents regardless of the strength of MCFD's legal authorization and mandate.

SPREAD THE WORD / Part 442 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

I told you yesterday in Part 439, that I am back. I have been away for three weeks. I knew that I might miss developing events at this crucial time both in Zabeth's pregnancy and in the timing for the court case ruling by Judge Crabtree. I have returned to the grim news of baby Josiah's apprehension by the regional workers of MCFD under the Director's orders. Together with you and the Baynes I await the Judge's ruling between now and the end of this month.

The Case: Paul and Zabeth Baynes three children are in the care of the Ministry of Children since October 2007.
Case Premise: MCFD posits that a doctor's diagnosis of shaken baby explains the youngest child's injuries sustained when she was several weeks old while the Baynes offered that one of their toddler son's impacted the infant in a fall while the baby was blanketed on the floor.
Case Status: Court case is completed and we are waiting Judge Thomas' ruling either to return the children to the Baynes or to grant permanent Ministry care and inevitable adoption.
Case Addition: Zabeth conceived a fourth child before the end of the court case, and MCFD waited until the infant's birth and five hours later took custody of Josiah just days ago.
Case Hearing: MCFD is required to present their latest seizure rationale to court and this is scheduled now for Feb 24th.

While MCFD is entirely within its mandate and mission to have effected this, the action offends the sensibilities of fair-minded people. Having now returned, I intend to cover this latest development in the Bayne Family saga from numerous angles and to write frequently EACH DAY. Stay tuned, glued, to this GPS site, offer comments, take action by writing to MLA's, senior government officials, news media offices and journalists. With courtesy exhort the recipients of your messages to take an interest in this family and their plight. While many will state an ability to engage a before-the-court case, or otherwise vacate responsibility, the exposure of this case to a widening audience will benefit the Baynes and if not them, then eventually some other families. I am still hopeful that Judge Crabtree has judged the Baynes more accurately than has the MCFD Fraser Valley contingent.

Friday, February 18, 2011

3,000 Hits yesterday and today

People are being informed. Continue to assist the Baynes by asking MLA's, MCFD Leaders, News Media people to pay attention to this case.

A LETTER TO A FRIEND FROM A DISTRESSED MOM / Part 441 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

On Mary Ellen Kragh's Facebook page, a letter from Zabeth Bayne has been printed following the apprehension of her several hour old newborn son, Josiah. She wrote it on February 17th.

Hi There,

Just a little update from yesterday. We arrived at the nursery at 6:00 which was the earliest we could as we had visitation from our other three little ones from 10:00 to 5:00. It appears that SW arranged during a time he knew we would be out for the new foster parent to spend a couple of hours bonding with our son. We read this in the nurses notes. "Foster parent here from 11:00 to 1:00. This was arranged two days after birth - prior to any court order being approved for removal - prior to any decision being forwarded by Judge Crabtree supporting any evidence of risk.

Also in the nurses notes. SOCIAL WORKER (SW) gave me permission to breast feed for now, but no EBM (expressed breast milk).

My baby is small and needs this. He is not tolerating the formula that they have been giving him while my milk comes in. It is curdling and not digesting.

SW did this with Bethany. I was starting to breast feed her and pumping daily. I froze my milk for weeks and begged him to give it to her and he always refused. I think they may feel I might contaminate it in some way to harm my baby.

They never even arranged to have the milk tested. Yet they acknowledge we have no drug or alcohol abuse.

Also we were not given the live birth registration from the hospital that every parent gets. The Ministry must have denied us this. Are they planning on registering our baby's birth? They don't even know his full legal name. I don't understand if this is even legal.

Our hearts have been so heavy yesterday. I could not even look at our baby in my arms without crying. I came home and expressed more milk for him with tears knowing they will probably dump it. I have been scared to bond, but know that our baby needs us to continue fighting for him and his needs.

Thanks for all you have done. We would feel lost without you.

Court Hearing Postponed / Part 440 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

In a follow-up comment on my same blog post of a couple of days ago, confidant, advisor and advocate to the Baynes, Ray Ferris provided an update to the scheduled court hearing regarding Josiah. Please don't misunderstand but catch Ray's sardonic turns of phrase.

Ray Ferris said... "OOPS! OOPS! OOPS! TRIPLE OOPS!

"When the MCFD rushed in to snatch the Bayne baby on Feb 10th, they locked themselves into having to go to court and file presentation papers within one week. The case was set down for hearing this morning in the Surrey court. Conspicuous by his absence was the worker who swore the affidavit. This means that he could not be questioned on it.When the Baynes got to court they found that the director had already arranged to have the matter adjourned to Feb 24. The judge refused to let the Baynes speak, so once more the system is stacked against them. The judge did say that she recommended the case should be heard by Judge Crabtree, so someone is listening to me. Now I will tell you what is really happening here. The answer is simple DAMAGE CONTROL.

You see it goes something like this. When director Bruce McNeill spent months and years trying to decide whether to follow his lawyer's advice to return the Bayne kids, he painted himself into a corner. If he backed out after all that time he would look bad. No matter because the Baynes had no more money for lawyers and would be defenceless. Then that darned Doug Christie ruined all the plans and people were saying unkind things on the Ron Unruh blog. People are so heartless you know. Then that wretched Bayne woman makes life even more complicated by getting pregnant again in the middle of the trial. Not only that it was a planned pregnancy! How could she do that to him? In defence of Mrs.Bayne, she feels that she has a lot of mother love to give and she always wanted another child. Nobody could believe that the trial would go past September and she would be delivered long after it was over.

Anyway, this left poor Bruce McNeill with a terrible dilemma.How could he possibly rant on for three years that the Baynes were totally unfit parents and then ignore this new child. He must show stern resolve and remove it at birth. If he did not, he would look weak and nobody would respect him. However, he is of course a man of profound compassion and he sought a way out for himself and the baby. If the parents would would work diligently and sincerely with his staff and allow them to help her with her pregnancy, then they might be able to agree on a parenting plan which would avoid apprehension and also demonstrate his benevolence. This might have worked fine if that dreadful man Ray Ferris had not interfered and Ron Unruh had not backed him up. He actually told Mrs. Bayne to have no contact with him (the Director) or his staff because it would put too much stress on her during her pregnancy. What a terrible thing to say and that wounded him deeply. What choice did that leave the poor fellow but to apprehend at birth?

So he summoned his trusty obedient servant Mr. Darth Humeny and said "Go to that hospital, grab the Bayne baby and do not come home without him." So Humeny jumped onto his black stallion, and galloped off to the Royal Columbian Hospital. He stormed into the nursery, spurs jingling and loudly announced that he was apprehending the Bayne child and that from now on he was Josiah's daddy."
February 17, 2011 4:14 PM

"He paused only to drop by Zabeth's room and tell her what he had done.He asked her to understand that he was only obeying orders. Oddly enough, Zabeth was not in the mood for a chat.

He next went back to the nursing station and asked how soon he could come in with a foster mother to pick up the baby. It was only then that he found out that Josiah would take at least a couple of weeks to gain the necessary weight. OOPS! DARN. If only he had thought to ask on the way in. He could have phoned the boss for instructions, but now he had announced that Josiah was in care and he could not back out. The best that he and the boss could come up with was to try to see how they could restrict access to the Baynes in the special care nursery. Obviously the best thing for Josiah was mother's milk and the medical staff favoured breast feeding. Because he was so small Baby Bayne had to drink expressed milk for a few days. Bingo!

They put a ban on expressed milk. These dangerous parents would probably poison the bottle.

They seemed to be back in control, but all hell broke loose. Facebook news travels fast. Soon the Rep for children and youth was being swamped with letters. Members of the legislature were getting an earful and so was the minister and the deputy minister. I was writing to everyone pointing out that there had been no less disruptive plan explored as requred by law. The child would be perfectly safe until Judge Crabtree ruled at the end of the month and the parents had unrestricted access to their baby and he was bonding with his mum.

Humeny that he could salvage the situation, by simply withdrawing his complaint and making up the sort of feeble excuse that they do so well.

So this morning's court was an exercise in damage control. Everybody was saying to the director that he should get out of this before he did any more damage. Of course Bruce could not risk losing face by withdrawing the complaint, so he dashed off to his trusty lawyer, pleading for rescue. The lawyer did what all lawyers do when they are in a jam. You ask for an adjournment. So they got an adjournment with no change in the status quo. No interim custody order of any sort. Legal limbo. Judge Crabtree has given himself until the end of February to announce his ruling. There are only two more working days left after the scheduled court date, so it is virtually certain that the ruling will be out by then and all will be resolved. If the ruling is against the ministry there will be a media storm and this last piece of stupidity will be buried in the waves.

If only McNeill had listened to me in mid December when I urged him to be cautious and not to move before Judge Crabtree's ruling. If only Leslie Dutoit had followed my request to her to urge prudence on her director. As the due date drew nearer, I urged them again to be prudent. This reckless action gained them nothing and only added more difficulties for the Bayne parents When the Baynes are so distressed, all their supporters are also distressed."
February 17, 2011 4:19 PM