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.
Sincerely,
Dr. Ron Unruh
I can't see how this is within anyone's rights to be doing this. They have put a baby's life at risk, and caused profound trauma. On what basis? How can this possibly be justified?
ReplyDeleteHow many children must be "saved" by MCFD in order to justify such abuse of power? If they are doing this in the very public eye, what sort of things have they been doing - are they doing - that aren't in the public eye?
They have no shame, they have no decency. Begging them, and pleading with them has not done anything; in fact, it has only made them worse. These people are quintessential bullies. They will never stop until they are made - by the law, or the people - to stop.
well put
ReplyDeletewonderfully written!
ReplyDeleteWell said! Thank-you.
ReplyDeleteBCLocalNews is now publishing articles written by MCFD employees, wherein this MCFD lackey writes about the "need to redefine trauma, neglect, and maltreatment to encompass a broader spectrum of inappropriate or less advantageous behaviours. Move away from thinking it is only physical and sexual abuse and realize it can encompass constant upheaval, arguing and fighting, and ignoring of a child’s needs."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.bclocalnews.com/lifestyles/116412134.html
These people are constantly working overtime to redefine the definition of abuse. Pretty soon, if we don't stop this madness, all children will automatically be taken "into care" at birth. Think that is crazy? No crazier than what is happening to the Baynes, in the public eye.
It's so important that we all attend on Thursday February 24, at the Surrey courthouse and let the judge and others know by our presence how much we support the Baynes. Take the morning off work, if necessary. Please, everyone, try hard to attend.
I concur Anon 9:32 AM, it is a virtual madness when the definition of warrantable intervention and child removal is so sweeping that every normal family issue is interpreted as abuse or neglect.
ReplyDeletewell done!
ReplyDelete***JOSIAH IS BEING DISCHARGED FROM HOSPITAL THIS AFTERNOON***
ReplyDeleteHe is still tiny and needs to be breastfed, not to mention NEEDING nurturing and bonding with HIS mommy and daddy.
How can the MCFD possibly think this is in his best interest???
You are so right, anon 6:51 when you said:
"They have no shame, they have no decency. Begging them, and pleading with them has not done anything; in fact, it has only made them worse. These people are quintessential bullies. They will never stop until they are made - by the law, or the people - to stop."
FixCAS posted a note on Loren Humeny's attendance to personally announce to Zabeth the removal of her newborn, but apparently did not have the time to attend the report to court hearing. Clearly, MCFD would rather have the child out of the hospital and placed in a foster home first before Judge Crabtree rules, hence the extra week delay.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.fixcas.com/cgi-bin/go.py?2011a.Humeny
Bayne Update
February 19,
The case of newborn Josiah Bayne came to court for the first time on Thursday, February 17. Social worker Loren Humeny, whose schedule was flexible enough to seize the baby five hours after birth, could not find the time to get to the courthouse. MCFD lawyer Finn Jensen was also unavailable, so the hearing was postponed to February 24. Ray Ferris (below) has an opinion on why they played hooky. Enclosed is the blog entry by Ron Unruh along with the comments giving facts. Other comments on the original blog contain a debate between supporters and opponents of the Baynes.
In writing letters condemning MCFD actions, it would have more impact if authors could cite multiple cases, not just the Baynes. This will help prevent gatekeepers of such communications from filing everything under "Baynes" and chalking such communication up to lobbying efforts of Baynes supporters.
ReplyDeleteNow it is more important than ever to attend the court hearing on Thursday, February 24, 2011 at the Surrey Courthouse, even though these bullies MCFD will try to find a way to adjourn again.
ReplyDeleteMagnificent job Dr. Unruh! You said it for all of us. And thank you so much on behalf of all parents so unjustly robbed of their children for bringing such balanced focus to the subject of legal abductions by child protection agencies. You are an angel for them all!
ReplyDelete