Sunday, September 16, 2012


I want you to be aware of the substance of a statement carried online on the open Facebook page dedicated to advocacy for Ayn’s return to her biological parental custody and care. Look up 'Help Bring little Autistic girl back to her Daddy.'

Derek Hoare is Ayn’s father and on September 5th he was commenting on a disagreeable situation. His ex-wife Amie Van Dyk with whom he has an amicable and respectful relationship and with whom he shares the deep desire for restoration of full parental rights with regard to their daughter Ayn, reported that she had been refused visitation time. (As you may know, Ayn is in the care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development since June 16, 2011, four days after she wandered from her back yard for a three-hour jaunt, and MCFD workers deemed that she required care and assessment and stronger control and that Derek as primary caregiver to three children, two of whom are autistic, required their assistance. Taking his child, immediately loading her with psychotropic drugs and locking his life into cycle of legal contest to retrieve her is that which Ministry personnel have accomplished.)

Apparently Amie received a call from Community Services at 9:40 AM on Wednesday, September 5th to inform her that her 1 PM appointment to visit her daughter was cancelled because Ayn had another meltdown at school. This was Ayn’s first day back at school. Special needs children began a day later than other children. The meltdown likely occurred soon after school began. It is surmised that a call was placed from the school to the foster home. It can be presumed that the foster home had to decide whether to bring Ayn home from school. The child’s social worker would be informed and would typically decide whether or not to proceed with or to cancel the visitation with Amie. On this day the social worker was on vacation so an acting SW responsible for Ayn’s file will have made this decision, called Community Services that then made the call. Consequently, time passed and Amie who was ready to visit her child, instead received cancellation notice 2.5 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.

No one knows what precipitated the meltdown yet it seems probable that the return to school may have been the trigger. Nevertheless, Ayn knows that her mother visits on Wednesdays and she would have wanted to see her mom, and she could have, and likely would have calmed down in the two hours that followed the meltdown. Cancellation of visitation was doubtlessly unnecessary. But of course, Ayn’s outbursts are managed by drugging the child, a powerful neuroleptic drug called Seroquel. Her tantrums can be controlled with this but of course a proper visit becomes unlikely. The child will not engage with her mother because she will be so severely sedated, she is virtually unresponsive. Knowing that, then of course it became necessary to cancel the visit.

What Derek and Amie find offensive and disgusting is the explanation from the Community Services worker that Ayn had not wanted to come to the visit. Beyond that is the reprehensible assumption that this stupefied condition is in the child’s best interests. Derek puts it this way. “My little girl is suffering; she is angry; she is confused. She needs understanding, not a damn nerve-seizing agent. Regardless of whether she is a child; regardless of whether she is disabled, she has rights.


  1. Cancelled parental visits are a TOOL to create a greater disconnect between parent and child. That social workers and their processes embody this kind of tool speaks volumes about their intent, is the reason for the outcry from the masses, and the reason universities have begun to drop social work programs from their offerings (Southhampton, UK, 2012).

    This child's best ally in a meltdown at school would be her natural parents, so so sad this child is alone and without her best supporters.

  2. The little girl has Autism. It was the first day of school. Children on the spectrum thrive on routne and suddenly it was distrupted and then, FURTHER distrupted, punishing both HER and the PARENTS for a most natural reaction to change, by dismissing her from visitation with her mother who could have de-escalated the situation. Instead, DRUG the child into compliance! :(

  3. My heart goes out to this man and his family. the department of family services is by far the most destructive organization since Hitler and the Nazi's. in fact i am pretty sure Hitler was the implementation tool for this company to further rule families and commit genocidal acts for generations to come, long past his expiry. I see countless families torn apart and yet there is very little that our govt is willing to do. it will be another 50 years before our government is issuing another less then heartfelt apology to our country for yet another tragic act of family cruelty, human rights that have been trampled on, and genocidal acts. Its truly hard for me to say I am a proud Canadian. The american govt flew planes into their own buildings to initiate a war, we kidnap children from loving homes to sell them for profit are we any better?

  4. Children adopted from MCFD-care are free. The government does not receive funds for those children, and in fact, pays families to adopt them.

    Want to try spinning another conspiracy?

    If you aren't a proud Canadian you are free to immigrate to....Congo, Afghanistan, Haiti etc etc.

    ps-social work around the world began through animal protection services. cheers.

  5. Hello Anon Sept 18 5:53 PM
    Since my subject did not reference MCFD motivation with an allusion to profiteering, I can only assume that your comments were directed to Dawna whose comment preceded yours. I do not identify with Dawna's comments. I have in the past found the angry connectives to Hitler and Nazis tiresome and not helpful to the discussion. Further, the pro-conspiracy comment about 9/11 being orchestrated by the Bush government of the US military or FBI quickly discredits the expression of sympathy for Ayn in Dawna's bit. I am a proud Canadian and our freedoms are unparalleled in the world, yet I write as an advocated for causes in which I believe because our basic freedoms permit me that as an inherent right of a citizen. When I am aware of issues that appear to me to violate our democratic core, I want to speak to it.

  6. You are right, Ron. My comment wasn't directed toward your post at all. It was directed at "Dawna."


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