Sunday, September 2, 2012

A BOURNE LESSON ABOUT CHILD PROTECTION

That's Ayn, 14 months in custody & away from family
Christine and I and our two great friends watched the Bourne Legacy last night. I loved it and I am eager for yet another sequel. The action riveted my attention and the volume was certainly cranked enough to compensate for my hearing deficit. I am fascinated by the story-line of the Bourne series - a government agency gone rogue. I pay attention to the movie script. One line struck me flat in the face as an explanation for the criminal activity of a government funded, well-resourced, unaccountable, secretive agency. “What we do is morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.” It struck me instantly that this must be the same injudicious rationale used by Child Protection agencies to justify their actions against parents like Derek Hoare and Aime Van Dyk and with children such as Ayn.

In Ayn's case, it is the Ministry of Children and Family Development in British Columbia that is responsible for this indefensible and entirely unnecessary heart-ache.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 comments:

  1. AnonymousSeptember 3, 2012 at 12:01 AM

    Bingo.

    And don't forget about the people and organizations behind the mask who benefit from the money spent (mainly our tax-dollars)

    Spent how? How about to begin with: for service fees/product fees/course fees/feesfeesfees & salaries/profits .. just follow the money! through the rabbit trails.

    Impact: inane circular bureaucratic logic that whips up intimidating baloney fests in courts, that result in the oppression and suffering of all the victims (families as a whole).
    And while they're at it, why put families back together again as quickly as possible, when it is more $-in-the-dark-pocket for keeping families apart for as long as possible..maybe even forever, for maximum dark (hidden-in-plain sight) cashflow!

    What did Sherlock Holmes say about finding the answer to a mystery? something about eliminating all the possible explanations and exposing the last possibility, no matter how unbelievable, as the only possibility being the answer to the mystery?

    ReplyDelete
  2. AnonymousSeptember 3, 2012 at 12:06 AM

    correction: salaries/profits should read "bloodstained salaries/tainted profits"

    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

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)