Tuesday, January 3, 2012


As of Tuesday evening at 11:00 pm, there have been 424 comments to Kathy Tomlinson's Go Public documentary on Paul and Zabeth Bayne's four year battle to recover their family, four children (438 by 6AM Wed). Those comments convey the growing distrust of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and a public demand for changes and reform to our child protection in B.C.  Tomlinson's news story was aired several times on Tuesday, Jan 3, 2012 and printed online under the title,

Court proceedings dragged on for 4 years

Posted: Jan 3, 2012 3:59 AM PT  / Last Updated: Jan 3, 2012 7:09 AM PT

I was pleased with Kathy's effective journalism yesterday aired at regular news hours including 6PM and 11PM. She encapsulated the Baynes' story for first time viewers of their ordeal. It was a staggering reminder to me of what my friends endured for 4 long years. Viewers will have found it incredible. Even Minister Mary McNeil expresses on air the need to speed up the process for what I and others believe to be a broken child protection system. The eldest three were removed in 2007 and their youngest baby was seized hours after his birth. Well not precisely. Social Workers arrived to remove him but his prematurity required that he stay for almost two weeks before he was taken from the hospital. He was so small he didn't fit into a car seat without stuffing it with blankets. Then there was a battle over whether this baby would be allowed to drink Zabeth's milk. At times it became an expose on the primitive quality of training of Ministry personnel. Despite Judge Crabtree's March 2011 decision that the Baynes' daughter had not been shaken by one or both parents in 2007, these parents had to endure many more months of MCFD protocol before the children were all returned in August. Even then, a three month probationary period was imposed during which time MCFD could inspect how the family was getting on. Finally, the file has been closed. At least that is the word received, but is anyone ready to believe anything that the Fraser Region of the MCFD says?


  1. I think for the family to TRULY be safe from their intrusion and watchful eye(who's to say they won't keep monitoring them just waiting for the chance to "find" something else they don't like to oppress them AGAIN?) they have to move out of the jurisdiction, away from their prying eyes and just start over again somewhere else in order to truly be free and to feel safe.

  2. I can't say whether the Baynes have ever considered this. I know that numerous other parents have spoken about doing this. There are incidents (i.e. UK) of parents fleeing from UK to Ireland and the CPA tracking them down and getting a court order to bring them back and still to take the children. But that was an open case. The Baynes case is now closed. But as you say, "prying eyes....."

  3. I would scour through the comments, preserve them, and publish the best ones. There are public relations analysts would go through these and collate the information to measure public opinion in comparison with other issues. The comments indicate that the public opinion of Child Protection, specifically MCFD is scathing. This type of news coverage is important leverage to continue to build public anger at the incredible damage government is inflicting on families. At some point something has to break and force a response. The upcoming election in 2013 might be enough time to prepare and drive home this point as an election item.


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