Monday, August 1, 2011

JOSIAH IS HOME TOMORROW & PRIVACY - SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO GIVE IT UP / 586


JOSIAH IS COMING HOME TO STAY TOMORROW!
--------------------------------------------------------------
We have become large on privacy matters. Companies and corporations are bound now by privacy law which affects what information can be published with regard to employees, partners and clients. But we are a confused society. Our privacy is forfeited at every turn. We are all under surveillance whenever we walk beneath street cameras, swipe cards, surf the net. Increasingly sophisticated computer systems now track for companies and government what you are searching online whether you are at home or work. Surveillance was once a word associated only with law enforcement but is now an unavoidable aspect of life in our world.

Ask Paul and Zabeth Bayne and Derrek Hoare what life is like when you relinquish a private life.

Privacy makes life bearable at times. Yet when parents get into difficulty with the Ministry of Children and they have no one to whom they can turn, they surrender privacy in exchange for public exposure of their claim of unjust treatment. Sometimes it works and sometimes it is futile. News agencies love a good story and will seize upon an opportunity to print, publish or air a provocative piece, but it is old as soon as it appears once and the news hounds move on.

Fortunately, in both the case of Paul and Zabeth Bayne and Derek Hoare, numerous news sources interviewed these parents because the subject speaks to government disservice and tugs at heart strings. To tell their story Paul, Zabeth and Derek have relinquished their right to a private life. They concluded that there is no option. They themselves and their children required resolution to the intrusion of a government agency that has dispossessed them of their own family life and the exchange of familial love and care. They also learned that there are hundreds of other parents similarly affected by a ministry that is confused about its mandate, excessively empowered and predictably given to imprudent and mistaken decisions. Further, they concluded that their stories and those of other parents must be told in order to bring, through sympathetic, legislative and legal channels, healing, correction and change that may spare families in the future. So they have become public figures, not attention seekers, but change makers.

For the past four years Paul and Zabeth Bayne have been advocating evidence-based medicine and speaking up about medical misdiagnoses that can ruin families. They have operated websites, one of which has now become a primary resource for articles by experts who speak to these issues. It is called Medical Misdiagnosis Research.

The Baynes have also spearheaded the development of a Conference, the first of which is to be held here in Surrey, B.C. on August 4-6, 2011 and will feature a number of international presenters. It is the Evidence Based Medicine and Social Investigation Conference. This impetus has stemmed from the mistaken accusation that either Paul or Zabeth was responsible for shaking their infant daughter in 2007, when in fact, the theory of Shaken Baby Syndrome, rather than gaining widespread acceptance within the medical community, has come under increasing criticism and challenge by qualified bio mechanical and medical experts.

I have no doubt that Derek Hoare has similarly generated a tsunami of sympathetic and communal response that will become a change agent not only for the return of his nine-year old daughter Ayn, but also an altered policy response by child protection designers to families with an autistic child. Autism needs to be understood by all child protection personnel. Behaviours of an autistic child must not and cannot be viewed uncritically as indicators of parental incapacity, or mismanagement or neglect or possible abuse. Social workers who have not received autism awareness must not be permitted to process any case involving an autistic child. And for goodness sake, the occasional wandering of the autistic child and chronic misbehaviour at school must never be the justification for removal of the child from her parent resulting in subsequent months of deprivation of parental love and security and certain terrorization and psychological damage. Be assured that the network of autism foundations, agencies, parents, experts, and the assorted journalists willing to cover a story like this, will be pressuring this Liberal BC government to affect an immediate return of Ayn to her daddy but also will leverage changes to policy and practice. The return of this child to her father should happen now without further delay.

The price of privacy yielded, will in these cases make life better for many people. Like so many others, these three people are heroic figures who only want to be left alone.

Please contact Derek Hoare directly at 

Derek Hoare iconoclast_ensues@yahoo.com 904-HELP AYN 904-435-7296

7 comments:

  1. Even with the children returned at long last the family still has no privacy or freedom with the Ministry still monitoring and assessing them; they will always have their oppression and watchful eye hanging over them and this is not right. Everyone should have freedom; it is a basic human right.
    I also wonder: what of the kids born in "captivity" and those taken while they were still very young? Will they even know their parents? The Big Brother child welfare has disrupted,destroyed,and forever changed their lives and freedom(as well as countless other innocent families as well)in more ways than one.It is a national disgrace that this takes place here as if it were a Communist country.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It would appear Ayn, the young child at the center of this controversy has her life turned upside down.

    Neither parent, lawyer, not ANYONE has seen Ayn since June 16, 2011. That is what, 40+ days? What kind of a government refuses access in any way shape or form of a child who the Ministry admits cried for 19-days straight for her daddy? Dad supplying a picture to help Ayn's captures ease her fears speaks volumes at the callous nature of this government and its operatives.

    The social workers involved certainly enjoy their privacy. The foster parents are unknown and unaffected by this firestorm of public outrage.

    Derek does have the job of keeping his remaining two children separated from this tragedy. While he daily builds public support and responds to hundreds of emails daily, he must be cautious with the two children in his care that they are not removed as well.

    One wrong word said online, and the Ministry could swoop in again and take the two children he has left. Very scary.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 4:29 - Ayn's dad has stated publicly he won't go see his daughter until she is going home permanently.

    Innocent question - if no one has seen her how is it known she is crying for 19 days straight? Not in any way meant to demean her sadness.

    8:37 - how is a child "born in captivity"?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anon 9:49 PM

    I will let Anons 4:29PM and 8:37AM respond to you too. I understood that Derek received a report that she had cried for 19 days and this was accompanied by the request for a photo of him, which she now carries with him.

    8:37AM will have to answer the other query, "born in captivity" -- all that I can surmise is that this may be an allusion to Josiah being removed immediately or 4 hrs after birth.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Correction to earlier remark, first paragraph, "carries with her."

    ReplyDelete
  6. To Anonymous 1August 9:49 pm:
    Re; "Born in captivity":
    This is in reference to a child being born while the family is being held "hostage" by Child Welfare.The child is not born "free" but under oppression and supervision by Big Brother and is snatched away and kidnapped from their natural family almost right at birth and raised separated from their family and natural environment.

    ReplyDelete
  7. If the RCY, who is being so highly praised lately, was really doing her job, Ayn would have been home long ago. The RCY is busy reinforcing the perception that her job is to protect the children from potentially abusive relatives whose homes seized children may find themselves in. What about all the homes where children are abused that AREN'T relatives? Why is she focusing on the Children in the Home of a Relative program, as if this program is the cause of so much trouble. If it is the cause of problems, it's because MCFD has knowingly and deliberately put children with people they know will generate bad PR. Why isn't the RCY investigating all the abuse that goes on in foster care? Why focus on children who are with relatives? It really makes you wonder whose side she is on.

    ReplyDelete

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