Wednesday, March 16, 2011


You already know that former health services chief administrative officer Stephen Brown has replaced Lesley du Toit as the deputy minister of children and family development. His experience encourages me. Most of his career has been spent in child and family services. He was CEO of the Ma-mowe Capital Region, Child and Family Service Authority in Alberta. Stephen has worked for the Government of Alberta’s Ministry of Children’s Services where he was Executive Manager for that province’s Child Welfare Act Review. He has a PhD focusing on the management of strategic change in the public service and holds Masters degrees in Business Administration and Organizational Psychology. Brown's autobiography is posted on Royal Roads University's Website as I noted yesterday.

This is why I am hopeful:
  • I am eager to watch him confer with Mary-Ellen Turpel-Lafond, the Representative for Children and youth and designated watchdog over the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Ms. Turpel-Lafond's job was handicapped by a reported unwillingness by Leslie du Toit's office to collaborate or cooperate for the common outcome of healthy and improved practice.
  • I will be delighted to learn that Dr. Brown works in tandem with the Minister, newly appointed Mary McNeil, and that Ms. McNeil is not merely a defender of public mouthpiece for MCFD but a keenly advised player in a true transformation of the Ministry.
  • I am anxious to watch Dr. Brown assess the present state of Ministry practice within the regions, the judicial congestion of cases and whether he concludes that many of these court appearance could be avoided by improved early negotiation and service provisions.
  • I will be an avid supporter of any initiative he makes to licence all social workers so that there is uniform accountability.
  • I will want to know whether his experience in Alberta informs his directions and his leadership with respect to working with First Nations in B.C. to protect children with high respect for native culture and families.
  • I will look forward to watching his expertise in business administration accomplish improved services with MCFD's available budget and resources, as well as to watch his organizational psychology background address the structure of MCFD, the interplay of regions with Victoria, and perhaps somewhere in the not too distant future a fullscale review and revision of the Child, Family and Community Services Act which has generated this legal logjam.


  1. Until BCASW recognizes being a cp social worker does not necessarily mean one has a bachelor of social work, not all social workers (cp or otherwise) can or will be registered there. Dr. Brown has no control over this as BCASW is autonomous.

    BCASW does exactly what for SW's that makes you believe it is worthwhile to register with them? SW's (cp or otherwise) are accountable to their supervisor and employer whether they are registered there or not. For BCASW membership to be meaningful the BCASW would have to be given some sort of authority....not gonna happen anytime soon with collective bargaining agreements, unions, etc etc etc...

    The BCASW is not the College of Physicians.

  2. I am not hopeful about Dr. Brown, as I see that the very influential organization of which he is a board member has, as one its main partners whom his organization perhaps also receives funds from, an organization that still is actively doing research and publishing materials that promote the bogus Shaken baby Syndrome junk science.

    I did some quick research yesterday on this topic; my post should be on yesterday's blog for anyone interested in seeing the links that show that Dr. Brown is directly affiliated with those who are promoting the destructive junk science known as shaken baby syndrome.

    I'm not a physician or a scientist, but after a very short time it was fairly easy for me to determine that shaken baby syndrome is junk science. Any physician of Dr. Brown's stature and experience should surely be able to determine the same, and therefore not affililiate himself with, or serve on a board that is affiliated with, the bogus shaken baby syndrome promoters. As a director, Dr. Brown has responsibilities, and is exposed to liability. He cannot claim ignorance.

    Dr. Brown's prior affiliations with child protection do nothing to reassure me; in fact, the opposite.

    It's imperative that we realize who will and who will not be our allies. Just like World War II, if we get sucked into believing the lies and propaganda, we are doomed. Being naive, or in denial, or wanting to believe that those in authority and power couldn't possibly be corrupt will have catastrophic consequences for families, but especially for children, who are the biggest victims.

    And before anyone reprimands me for coming down so hard on such a "nice" looking, respectable, accomplished guy as Dr. Brown, please just check out the history of Charles Smith, formerly a highly esteemed pediatric forensic pathologist. The damage and suffering he caused should be enough to make all of us think twice about being so uncritically accepting of someone such as Dr. Brown.

  3. Thank you Anon 7:21 AM
    Yours is an important piece of information and dialogue. Much appreciated. helps others as well as me to understand.

  4. Here is bit from the excellent blog on Charles Smith:

    "...Smith's unscientific, utterly ignorant opinion, placed Louise Reynolds in a hell in which she was wrongly arrested as a murderer in her small city, imprisoned, and experiencing the horror of having her other children seized from her by the authorities.

    Similarly, Lindy Chamberlain, a bereaved mother, was branded as a killer and placed in her own hell, as a result of the Crown's forensic authorities who were oh so certain about their faulty opinions."

    For anyone interested in getting the Bayne's story into the media, the followi, from the Charles Smith blog quoted above, is worthwhile to note:

    "PUBLISHER'S NOTE: The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be accessed at:"

  5. Anon 8:59 AM as well as 9:05
    You commented about Charles Smith and you expressed concern about Dr. Brown's affiliation with SBS - we must keep in mind this caution and perhaps warning.

  6. How ironic. I completely missed that yesterday was the Ides of March and the 2055th anniversary of the murder of Julius Caesar. Did a reincarnation of Artimedorus utter an ominous warning to Leslie Dutoit. "Beware the Ides of March" perhaps? The comparisons between the two dictators are intereting. They were both combative empire builders and left a lot of bodies behind.Both appointed inadequate governors to rule the far flung provinces and both turned a blind eye to corruption and incompetence. Both were killed by being stabbed by several people. If Dutoit were Caesar, who would be Brutus, who would be Cassius and who Mark Anthony? The only sure pick for Calpurnia, the barren wife of Caesar would be Mary Polak.
    Responding to today's topic.Changes in government, ministers and deputy ministers have never made much difference before. They make brave statements of better things to come and then it is still the same old same old. That is because none of the top bureaucrats really know how to fix things.
    Regarding BCASW and registration. Neither the college, nor BCASW play any role in skill development. They set no standards of practice other than a general code of ethics and the college responds only to complaints under the code of ethics. The only time the old board of registration made any attempt to address standards was after the death of Matthew Vaudreuil and they did it in the clumsiest manner possible.They did a witch hunt on all registered social workers who were involved in the Vaudreuil case and accused them of breaching practice standards which they made up after the event. They got badly burned on that one. I offered to set up practice standards in chilc protection for them for future use. They never replied to me, nor did they take any other action. Yes I believe everyone should follow a code of ethics and I believe it is useful to have it written down and used in training. There is no reason at all why the children's ministry cannot adopt an identical code of ethics to the BCASW one an use it in training and staff appraisal.
    P.S. I shall really miss Leslie Dutoit.It really makes life so much more tolerable when one haa an identifiable villain to blame things on.

  7. Can someone please check and see if the Matthew Walker who is now social worker for the Baynes is Jason Matthew Walker the criminal.

    It would be unthinkable and most outrageous if they were one and the same, but given what MCFD has done thus far in the relatively highly publicized case of the Baynes, I wouldn't put it past them to hire, either deliberately or inadvertently, this criminal imposter who obviously cares nothing about the best interests of children.

    Criminals often tend will use other forms of their names to reincarnate themselves (e.g., Jason Matthew Walker could very easily become "Matthew Walker").

    This Jason Matthew Walker managed to dupe a great many people in positions of authority and esteem, and it was only until a bright cop realized, by checking Walker's resume against his age, that it was highly unlikely that he had all the credentials he claimed to have, as being, at that time 31 years of age (I believe), he couldn't possibly have earned all the degrees, etc., he claimed to have.

    Jason Matthew Walker and MCFD would be a perfect fit. Both have no regard for the rules or the best interests of the child. Please, if anyone is in the position to check this out, please verify that Matthew Walker is not Jason Matthew Walker, because as outrageous as it seems, MCFD has proven that anything is possible where they are concerned.

    Keep in mind that such an imposter as Jason Matthew Walker may have found ways to disguise his identity and appearance and relying on an Internet photo of him to compare with the current "Matthew Walker" social worker may not suffice.

  8. The College has a mandate is to "protect the public" from poor social work practice. We see every day what incredible damage a rogue social worker can do to a family. Having such protection may well have helped the Baynes.

    The College of Social Workers is listed as one of the two "Major Agencies, Boards and Commissions" on Premier Christie's appointments announcements page at The only other agency listed is the Provincial Child Care Council, they handle daycare.

    The BC Association of Social workers is more like a club where fellow social workers can get together on the public's dime and attend conferences to find out how to abduct more children more efficiently and keep them in foster care longer.

    Requiring protection workers to belong to the College of Psychologists would be a very safe bet for the current liberal administration to appease the public. What could possibly be the downside?

    After all, physicians (such as Dr. Brown) and psychologists are regulated by the college of physicians. Lawyers are regulated by the Bar.

    The point is, if a social worker chooses to violate a code of ethics, the public is protected by an external body outside of MCFD. This is sort of like preventing police from investigating themselves.

    I have seen how the college works. For the person complained about, the college acquires the files (or tries to) attempts to validate the matter, then holds a hearing. The social worker generally has to find a lawyer to deal with the matter. I'm not sure what the remedial outcome is supposed to be, the B.C. case I'm watching has not yet been resolved.

    The mere thought of this formal examination process serves as a deterrent for members. If a social worker still chooses to do nasty anti-social-work type things such as not mentioning relevant services, falsifying information within intake reports, not responding adequately with services and such, we the public need to be aware of that social worker's record in order to get that safe, warm fuzzy feeling of being able to trust that person.

  9. Anon March 16 10:31 AM re: Jason Matthew Walker

    Repeatedly now, you or someone else has asked 'someone' to inquire for you whether the newly assigned MCFD caseworker to the Baynes by the name of Matthew Walker is one and the same as discredited Jason Matthew Walker, 31, who in summer and autumn 2010 was under investigation for falsely claiming to hold two PhDs, which allowed him to gain positions at the University of Victoria and a Saanich counseling clinic. He was also charged with fraud, forgery, and swearing a false affidavit. I doubt that anyone is going to do your homework. The best that I can offer at the moment, is that it is highly unlikely that MCFD would miss this in a hiring interview. The entire province was aware of this case. Our concern is warranted but probably misplaced. I feel sorry for the social worker Matthew Walker who must more than once defend his identity.

  10. Ron,

    If you check into the gross negligence in terms of hiring Jason Matthew Walker, I don't think it is that clear that this it couldn't happen again.

    As for feeling sorry for the social worker Matthew Walker, I find that pretty difficult, since he is aiding and abetting the injustice to which the Baynes are subject. It would be better, and far more humane and ethical, to collect bottles for a living than take infants and children from their good, loving parents. No one can any longer plead ignorance, especially in the case of the Baynes which as been so widely published. Anyone who has anything to do with keeping this family apart cannot pretend they are "just doing their job."

  11. This is precisely what I mean 10:30

    It is you again. I am sure you mean well and you feel the criticism of the Ministry and its personnel is deserved as do I, and I admit that I have published many Anonymous comments which stretch the bar that I set by my three preferred guide rules for comments, and I am not happy with continuing to do that. I am not pleased any longer to print comments pertaining to Matthew Walker or his identity or his work, unless something of substance warrants it.

    My expectations for submissions are reasonable enough.

  12. For all who have been asking, Matthew Walker has been employed for twelve years with Surrey MCFD.

  13. Okay, well I guess if that information is accurate (that Matthew Walker has been employed by the Surrey MCFD for 12 years) - and heaven knows we have more than enough reason to distrust the accuracy of info flowing from or through MCFD - then we should be safe. But where children's lives are concerned, we should always be as vigilant as possible regarding those who are caring for them who are allegedly their protectors, especially in light of what we know.


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