I am appalled to learn that just hours after Josiah's birth into this world, the director of MCFD social workers for Chilliwack ordered the case worker to take authority of Josiah.
I have been on the other side of the globe, without communication and therefore unable to engage this story, personally sympathize with Zabeth and Paul or express myself to Bayne supporters and to MCFD practitioners. I am grateful to all of you who have contributed comments to the Bayne Campaign Facebook page and to numerous other websites that have carried this distressing story.
It is certainly within the parameters of the director's authority to do what he did. However, from an emotional standpoint I view it as 'criminal'. But he was legally supported. Nevertheless, it is nothing short of 'slander' to infer that Paul and Zabeth are a danger to this infant for whom they have been eagerly waiting. On the morning of his birth, it was a virtual thievery of their joy to have that custodial interruption - the epitome of heinousness and stupidity. Heinousness because it suggests that all child protection is heartless, cruel and malicious. Stupidity because it will serve to castigate the director and his piteous employees in the public opinion but also fuel a judge's determination to make an example of this inept crew. I would love to write something commendable about public servants but how can you with this behaviour.
This is power gone mad. This is protocol without good judgement. What must some of you child protection workers be thinking of your superiors when you are required to follow orders that violate conscience and good faith.
I heard of other similar stories but naively believe it couldn't happen here. The Baynes are one of nicest couples one can know. Their case is high profile. The director did not need to do this. He will defend his action as imperative. He cannot do otherwise when his affidavit alleged that the Baynes are a risk and that is why he wants the Judge to give him control of the other three forever. So this deplorable, absurd, unreasonable apprehension of a baby is what was done to Zabeth and Paul.
That Mary Polak and Leslie du Toit have maintained solidarity with this director's case handling puts this entire ministry further under the darkest cloud of suspicion of ineptitude. Don't tell B.C.'rs that transformation is the goal of MCFD. It is tainted.
Comment if you care to do so...
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
37 comments:
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
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No way to conquer evil with good. Time for revenge is coming. Finally.
ReplyDeleteEncourage ALL Bayne supporters to directly contact Mary Polak and Leslie du Troit @ ph# 250 387-9699 to express disgust with the injustice under their leadership of the MCFD to the Bayne family.
ReplyDeleteAs well, send an email to Gordon Campbell and Kevin Falcon, potential Liberal leader, that a cabinet shuffle should be considered, the removal of Mary Polak because with Polak and du Troit, the Liberals are losing votes.
Email addresses:
Mary Polak: MCF.Minister@gov.bc.ca
Leslie du Troit: MCF.DeputyMinistersOffice@gov.bc.ca
Gordon.Campbell.MLA@leg.bc.ca,
Kevin Falcon: info@kevinfalcon.com,
My MLA, Gordon Hogg: gordon.hogg.mla@leg.bc.ca
Fantastic editorial Ron, so balanced and true. Thank you Jeff for providing email addresses so we can speak up as well.
ReplyDeleteAs a CASA GAL charged with advocating for what is in the best interest of a child in CPS cases in the US I am appalled that anyone functioning under a charter to protect children could ever see this baby being in harms way at 6 hours of age while in a hospital. To rob this child and his parents of the bonding so necessary to newborns is tantamount to torture.
No doubt the ministry has seen for the three years that the Baynes have been fighting to regain custody of their three older children that there has never been a doubt as to whether they have hurt their children since their removal. Their visits have been supervised the entire time and surely visits would have ended had there been any concern about the parents appropriateness with their children. Therefore there is 3 YEARS of undeniable evidence that these parents are not only safe but nurturing to their kids. How then do these people justify taking the baby?
God bless the Baynes and you Mr. Unruh for fighting the good fight on behalf of all those who will come behind you and don't have the strength, courage, grace and wisdom to teach the ministry as the Baynes have attempted to do. It is well past time for all Child Protection System to review their charters and recommit to their missions, to protect and support children. Part of that job includes realizing the importance of parents in their children's lives and provide the support necessary to reunite the children and parents. Not to use any excuse possible to divide a family, particularly as in this case when overwhelming evidence both medical and practical exists to show that these parents are not only safe but positive influences on these precious children.
Welcome back Ron;you have been sorely missed. You have rightly used the verbal scourge, so more from me would be superfluous. I will heed the legal term "res ipse loquitor" and let matters speak for themselves. Here are some facts.
ReplyDelete1.Baby Josiah was born very small and must remain in the special care nursery until the end of February.
2. He is perfectly safe in this environment and his parents have unrestricted access to him
3.The physicians want Mrs. Bayne to breast feed her son and this is in his best interests, so she must have complete access.
4.Obviously the child is already in a safe and non-disruptive situation and no action is necessary.
5.The ministry has had an action against the other Bayne children for the last three years and all evidence was completed by August 13,2010.
6.Provincial chief judge T. Crabtree was the trier of fact in the case and he has said that he will make his ruling before the end of February.
7.There is no new evidence on Josiah Bayne and the only evidence that the director can claim to have is directly linked to the case on the other children.
8. Should his honour Judge Crabtree rule against the director, their case about Josiah will collapse.
9.Knowing that baby Bayne was in a perfectly safe environment, the social worker could have and should have awaited Judge Crabtree’s ruling before taking any further action. To do otherwise is unnecessary, hostile and a waste of court time.
10 As Judge Crabtree has heard many days of evidence about the Bayne family, he is very familiar with all the circumstances. It is obvious that he would be the most suitable trier of fact for Josiah. He might well wish to reserve the case to himself if told about the situation and he should have been asked if he wanted to be seized. The director had ample time to do this and can still do it before Josiah is discharged from hospital.
11 Under the circumstances the apprehension was not needed and interim custody to the director is not warranted. The child can quite safely be left in the custody of his parents and the judge should so order. The situation can always be reviewed after Judge Crabtree rules.
NOTE WELL. Humeny must swear an affidavit and a check box will show that no less disruptive plan was available. This is simply untrue and he did not even consider the matter. If he swears to this it will be tantamount to perjury. I will have much more to say later.
why was this baby born near his due date so small? This mother knows she is at risk of premature labor which luckily in Josiahs case didnt happen.Wouldnt 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 arguement 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! Thats 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 shouldnt have them! Healthy eating is not too much to ask and it isnt excusable.
ReplyDeleteANONYMOUS AT 11:59 AM
ReplyDeletePuleeeeese!! Get the facts. Who are you to presume to write such accusations and trash. Get on the stand where facts, not opinions, are important.
TO ANONYMOUS 09;55
ReplyDeleteFact - Josiah was born at 3 lbs 15 oz. One ounce shy of four pounds. Small yes. The reason why? An abnormally large placenta that was as big as the baby and robbed him of some of the nutrients which should have gone to him. It was not discovered until birth (no, the obstetrician did not do a ultrasound later in the pregnancy which could have picked this up). This is called an anomaly. It is no one's FAULT
FACT - Zabeth did everything humanly possible to ensure a healthy birth for Josiah including months of bedrest coupled with being pushed around in a wheelchair when they had to go out in order to avoid preterm labour. And kudos to her - she DID avoid preterm labour. Newsflash - 2 weeks early is not prematurity. It is considered full term. And she did eat properly and take the necessary vitamins.
FACT - iT WAS IMPOSSIBLE for her to avoid stress during this pregnancy. How can you stay calm and relaxed when you have a Ministry dealing as many low-blows as they can, and threatening apprehension of your unborn child?
How dare you insinuate that Josiah's small birth weight is Zabeth's fault!
And then as to your quote "Premature or not, these were unhealthy looking little people"?!? Well another fact is that yes - prematurity does generally produce small children. Prematurity also leads to children who are more prone to illness so it would be very normal for them to appear small and perhaps ill at times. They still look like small, thin children despite being in care for over three years! They are for the most part healthy, but do they get sick sometimes even while in care? Of course!
But they also look incredibly happy and content when they are in the arms of the parents who love them and want them back.
Although your tone and insuation are wrong, you are correct in saying "There is so much more to this than innocent parents claiming they did no wrong." Yes indeed. There is a MCFD hell-bent on destroying a family instead of helping them reunite. There is a MCFD who have spent over a million dollars on this case by initiating endless court delays. There are social workers who have lied and been caught lying in court. There are people who choose to believe lies of abuse and neglect instead of trying to find out the truth. Have you researched any of the articles online regarding the MISDIAGNOSES of SHAKEN BABY SYNDROME? There's quite a few. Have you heard of Charles Smith, the disgraced Ontario pathologist who's great influence had innocent people declared guilty of killing their children and had them sent to jail only years later to find out, HE WAS WRONG and people have been released. I don't suppose you attended any of their court days, did you? Tried to get some objective information?
Or do you just want to believe what you want to believe and sling around as much malice and inuendo as you possibly can?
Shame on you.
TO ANON at February 17, 2011 11:59 AM:
ReplyDeleteYou wouldn't happen to be a social worker, or perhaps the foster parent, would you now? You sure sound like you have a personal stake here.
nope I am not one of the above dreaded SW's or a Foster Parent. Just someone in the public that noticed some things that seem not quite normal. I'm not the only one, but probably the only one who has dared to leave a comment on a blog meant for the Bayne family and their supporters. And obviously this family did not do everything they could to ensure a healthy baby this time around, otherwise they wouldnt have chosen to have a child in the middle of a stressful trial!! Just sayin......
ReplyDeleteGood to have you back blogging Ron!
ReplyDeleteIn Ray Ferris' comments, he spoke truth to the waste of time and money by the MCFD with drawing this court case on.
Today was another example of this waste of money. Today was the scheduled hearing for the application of the temporary custody of baby Josiah by the MCFD, but guess who didn't show up? That's right the social worker, Loren Humeny, and MCFD's lawyer, Finn Jensen, were not "available"! Unreal! They have time to show up and remove an infant after birth but cannot keep their appointment that they set to legalize their actions! Pathetic and obvious stall tactics!
The only redemption today was the look on the presiding judge's face when the whole packed courtroom stood and left as she adjourned this case. She was surprised to see so many people and questioned her staff why this was even in her court when it is really should be where it started....in Judge Crabtree's courtroom!
To Anon February 17, 2011 3:15 PM -
ReplyDeleteSo what are you "just sayin" - that everyone who has a premature baby is suspect, and should have their baby taken from them? I strongly suspect you do work, in some capacity, for the Ministry.
I am new to reading this blog. As a mother of 3 children I am actually scared for who this might happen to next. So I have never met the Baynes family. I have no vested interest.
ReplyDeleteBut am I missing something - the actions of the Ministry do seem to be criminally negligent. Not specifically referring to the new baby, but rather their failure to seek any additional medical opinions or entertain the idea that they might be wrong. Why is there no cry to write the Attorney General and ask for an official investigation into the Ministry's actions? Is there simply a delay while waiting for the final judgement? As a member of the public, I would welcome it.
Miriam,
ReplyDeleteYou are right to be scared. It could happen to anyone next; we all need to work together to ensure that it does not. MCFD and other child protection agencies have been getting away with murder for too long now, mainly because ordinary citizens have been kept in the dark. Thanks to the dedication of Ron Unruh, Doug Christie, the Baynes and their supporters, that will be changing. MCFD will be held accountable.
Keep spreading the word, however, whenever, and by whatever means possible. Stick to the truth, because that is persuasive enough.
Does anyone know when the next court appearance is scheduled for (the one that was adjourned today). We will attend if at all possible.
ReplyDeleteAnon at February 17, 2011 3:15 PM;
ReplyDeleteIf you were so good at "noticing" things, you would have "noticed" that MCFD destroys good, loving families.
OOPS! OOPS! OOPS! TRIPLE OOPS!
ReplyDeleteHERE IS THE VERY LATEST ON THE BAYNE CASE'
When the MC&FD 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 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.
To Anon at 3:15
ReplyDeleteDo a little research into the case. Look and see how many times this case had been delayed. They didn't "choose" to have a baby "in the middle of a stressful trial". This custody hearing should have been FINISHED months and months ago. The fact that the decision has been so drastically delayed is because of the ministry and their attorney's actions. Delays, delays, delays, none of which in their control.
Wow, you are one judgmental person.
Loving the dialog. I have been following the case for some time now.
ReplyDeleteMiriam, Yes, I believe everything has to wait for the court's decision.
To Anon February 17, 2011 2:15 PM
Yes, everything to do with the Bayne's case is "not quite normal". I find it interesting with those I speak with how quick many are to find the parents at fault even some who are aquatinted with them! Their comments being "well if the ministry has taken the children they must have a reason" and a bias that the ministry is always right. But what if they aren't. What if they are making a huge mistake and abusing their power and influence and the whole system? Why was today's court hearing in Surrey courts when it should have been in Chilliwack? Was that to make room for admin to juggle the case between the two court houses so more time would be wasted on this delicate case? Or that the lawyer and the social worker weren't there when they have had 9 months to plan their course of action?
I wonder myself, in court when they suggested to Zabeth that she abort this little one and she didn't... if they wanted him dead and she wanted him alive... why do they care now that Josiah is alive? Yes, it is an awkward and inconvenient time to perhaps have a new addition to the family, but occasionally in marriage these gifts are given when we may not have asked for them. But gifts are always welcome!!
Triple oops continued.
ReplyDeleteHe 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. Now if the judge rules against the ministry, they will look even worse than they did before. The child was already in a safe and non-disruptive plan and all they had to do was sit tight and wait. That is why I told the rep for children and youth that the apprehension was reckless. I told 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.
Just a little correction
ReplyDeleteI addressed my comment written at 1:57 to
Anon 9:55, but it should have been addressed to Anon 11:59.
Ray, love your updates and descriptions of what has transpired. Thanks for being the encourager and friend you are to the Baynes.
ReplyDeleteMCFD, Loren or Lorne Humeny, Bruce McNeill, and Finn Jensen just keep digging themselves a deeper hole. They may be cunning, but they aren't very intelligent. But I guess when you've got away with what they have for so long they must feel invincible. Too bad that their house of cards is about to come crashing down.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe a large placenta causes low birth weight. Google it. In fact, I read the opposite.
ReplyDeleteThis case really is only about medical incompetance. Social services simply has no business being involved. The children are not in need of MCFD's incredibly expensive brand of "protection."
ReplyDeleteSue the bastards like Diane Holden is doing. Remove children without due care and attention, and pay the price to deter future violations of basic fundamental human rights.
This case is all about a select few individuals concerned with saving face. MCFD in turn is protecting Dr. Colbourne so she can continue feeding MCFD hapless children. On a larger scale, the entire MCFD ecosystem is on trial, not the Baynes.
At some point, you are going to see the few dozen supporters lock hands around Paul, Zabeth and her children and have media there filming as police and social services try to pry their children away from them.
There are children in care of drug-addicted drunk parents who stay that way despite all efforts and the children are not removed. There are children in school that bully others because of poor parenting that will never be addressed. There are simply not enough foster homes to fit children born of these kinds of parents.
I agree 100% that Humeny, McNeil, Gulbot, Colbourne et al have painted themselves into a corner. Like cornered rats who know they are about to be squashed, they either scurry about hiding, or gnashing their teeth ineffectively. They can still cause a good deal of damage before their tenure ends.
MCFD employs nasty little vermin, I say.
Clearly the "Anonymous" troll uses the same investigative techniques employed by MCFD. 'If fact stands in the way of your opinion then obfuscate and malign.'
ReplyDeleteDon't get side-tracked by this. Don't feed the trolls.
Here is a suggestion from a poster on the Bayne's facebook page:
ReplyDeleteMichelle Penner FergusonThe Bayne Campaign for Justice
Directly contact Mary Polak and Leslie du Toit @ ph# 250 387-9699 to express your disgust with the injustice to the Bayne family under their leadership of MCFD.
Send an email to Gordon Campbell and Kevin Falcon, potential Liberal leader, that a cabinet shuffle should be considered - with Polak and du Troit, the Liberals are losing vot...es.
Email addresses:
Mary Polak: MCF.Minister@gov.bc.ca
Leslie du Toit: MCF.DeputyMinistersOffice@gov.bc.ca
Gordon Campbell: Gordon.Campbell.MLA@leg.bc.ca
Kevin Falcon: info@kevinfalcon.com
You can add another contact to write to:
Beverly Dicks and Linda McNulty Linda.McNulty@gov.bc.ca. Executive Director of Practice for Vancouver Coastal Region (she tells Bruce McNeil what to do, as I gather the Fraser region is now being handled by the Vancouver Coastal Region she heads.)
I would suggest writing paper letters to 601 - 700 West Georgia Street, Vancouver BC V7Y 1B6.
Also, fire off a message (or three) to Go Public's Kathy Tomlinson, who has done several prior stories on the Baynes.
Go Public is a weekly investigative news segment on CBC TV, radio and the web.
ReplyDeleteWe're now tackling in-depth stories for the fall and are wide open to ideas.
If you have a story for us, email gopublic@cbc.ca or use the form on this page.
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/gopublic/
FROM BAYNE'S FACEBOOK PAGE,
ReplyDeleteJust spoke with Nicholas Simons' office, NDP critic of MCFD (ph# 604-485-1249) to call for an internal investigation of Mary Polak's handing of the Bayne case, highlighting the custody removal of a 5 hr baby from his mother. Please call - Great to have numbers showing support for this investigation.
To Anonymous 2:40
ReplyDeleteThanks for the tip. I just called Nicholas Simon's office too and wasn't able to speak to his assistant (Meggie Hathaway) as she was in a meeting but left a message for her to call me.
Dear Pastor Ron,
ReplyDeleteYes, you were very naive (very nice, very kind, very forceful in your mission but very, very naive). Taking a newborn when other children are in the state's custody is the norm in many areas of the English speaking world. It is often called "risk of harm".
There was no doubt in my mind from the onset that the newborn would be taken-absent a positive decision for the other three.
I too have been away from our Continent for the past month. When I returned home, I eagerly looked for news of the Baynes and also saw what you saw, i.e., the taking of the baby.
I urge everyone to please please please continue to enlist legal help to end this ordeal for the Baynes.
Reader from NYC
Well NYC, I do remember you telling me this would happen.
ReplyDeleteOh we all knew that Bruce McNeill was itching to get his hands on baby Bayne as soon as he was born. He had to do this to justify his three year campaign against the Baynes. However, to do it without reviewing the immediate conditions was reckless. When the baby would be in safe nursery care until the judge rules was just plain stupid. He was not compelled to apprehend, because the child would be totally safe. So he could have kept his hands off the child, remained true to his obsession and still stayed on the side of the angels. He should have used what little brain he had and come out ahead in every aspect. Instead he sent a man of very limited ability who rushed in where angels fear to tread, anxious only to please the boss. Any social worker with half a brain would have made an up to date assessment and sought a consultation before going ahead. Now they are into big time damage control and it was quite unnecessary. He did not have to give up any of his bizarre allegations and he would have saved a little bit of the sting when Judge Crabtree rules against him. I agree the apprehension was predictable,but safely avoidable for his nibs and exceedingly stupid. Darth Humeny dutifully swore that no less disruptive method was available, which was of course a perjury, but fortunately for him, approved by his boss.
ReplyDeleteAs I understand it, Mr. Christie is not a part of Josiah's custody hearing but another poster mentioned that owing to Mr. Christie's non attendance on the 17th -that in part was the cause for said hearing to be adjourned. There must be a mix up here.
ReplyDeleteIt is all well and good that everyone is seeking public exposure and that Mr. Ferris continues to speak of his efforts to alleivate the Bayne's plight but it has been over three years now.
Mr. Ferris and others speak of damage control, if this Yank might have a turn at speaking of same, yes, it is damage control but not entirely of what Mr. Ferris is speaking.
In my opinion, it has nothing to do with what changes might be mandated with the MCFD -it has to do with a possible lawsuit.
I have kept my mouth shut on these forums as much as I have been able to do so BUT-it is all about law and not about the so called social change that Mr. Ferris seems to be speaking of. In fact, from Mr. Ferris' posts, I only find him to be self serving. Not that he means to be, I am sure he means to do well but he has mucked it up so far and will probably continue to do so.
Please, forgive me Mr. Ferris but three bloody years???
Please, please, please, nip this in the bud legally with legal counsel and Mr. Ferris, you can still do your touring engagements around your country in regards to your own pursuits.
Reader from NYC
Readers, Bayne Family Supporters:
ReplyDeletePlease also contact the La Leche League, as they should be very sympathetic to the injustice of denying a mother / infant the right to breastfeed, have the health and emotional benefits of mother's milk. You can also direct the La Leche League to Ron's blog, as well as Zabeth and Paul's Facebook page.
LA LECHE LEAGUE MEDIA CONTACT:
Teresa Pitman
Phone: 519-829-2293
Email: teresaannpitman@rogers.com
=======================
Philosophies
La Leche League Canada is an Affiliate of La Leche League International. We share a common purpose and philosophy. The basic philosophy of La Leche League is expressed in The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding and summarized in the following concepts.
Mothering through breastfeeding is the most natural and effective way of understanding and satisfying the needs of the baby.
Alert and active participation by the mother in childbirth is a help in getting breastfeeding off to a good start.
Mother and baby need to be together early and often to establish a satisfying relationship and an adequate milk supply.
In the early years, the baby has an intense need to be with his mother which is as basic as his need for food.
Breast milk is the superior infant food.
For the healthy, full-term baby, breast milk is the only food necessary until the baby shows signs of needing solids, about the middle of the first year after birth.
Ideally the breastfeeding relationship will continue until the baby outgrows the need.
Breastfeeding is enhanced and the nursing couple sustained by the loving support, help, and companionship of the baby’s father. A father’s unique relationship with is baby is an important element in the child’s development from early infancy.
Good nutrition means eating a well-balanced and varied diet of foods in as close to their natural state as possible.
From infancy on, children need loving guidance which reflects acceptance of their capabilities and sensitivity to their feelings.
------------------
La Leche League BC Contacts
British Columbia
Vancouver
604-520-4623
Victoria
250-727-4384
Reader from NYC;
ReplyDeleteCan you please tell us how to nip this in the bud legally?
A careful, detailed reply would be very appreciated.
As a mother I'm angry, as a resident of British Columbia I am angry. It is high time that MCFD lose their powers to remove children. It is time for a new Child Protection Agency be established. MCFD has shown time and time again that it is incapable of handling child protection cases in British Columbia efficiently. It is time for the government to step in Federal if necessary, and provide us citizens, an avenue to fight wrongful intrusions on behalf of the Ministry. What Zabeth and Paul have went through is appalling, there are no words to speak of how much disgust. What the Bayne children have been through is a greater tragedy. Perhaps this matter should be brought in front of Prime Minister Harper for some consideration, its obvious to me the Provincial Level of government isn't doing anything to stop the tragedies from happening. This should be a national issue, as there are stories all over Canada of Child Protection Agencies overstepping their authority. While Minister Polak sits on her butt doing nothing to stop this, perhaps she should also be kicked to the curb. It angers me to no available to see how a system that is set up to protect our children is failing, parents, and children alike. I myself grew up in foster care and it was no picnic, I went through 23 different homes. As a mother myself I have also had to deal with a wrongful intrusion on behalf of the MCFD. I am thankful that I was fortunate my intrusion lasted 44 days and not three years like the Baynes. Comment to Ray Farris - Perhaps we should bring this to the Prime Ministers attention, as it seems that the provincial government isn't doing anything neither are the Ministers whom he is appointing.
ReplyDeleteDiane,
ReplyDeleteGood idea (federal action). I think you may have to post your comment on a more recent blog day, however, if you want a response from Ray Ferris. Not sure if he will read one this far back.