AYN'S MOTHER GIVES US AN UPDATE

APRIL 14, 2013 - We expected that Ayn would have been returned home by now, but she is still in foster care. Her mom enjoys unsupervised visits with Ayn in the mom's house. Here is a five paragraph update from Ayn's mother Amie, concerning her visitation arrangements. It is encouraging as far as visit frequency and quality and even dialogue with the foster parents is concerned.  There continues to be in the minds of observers such as myself, a disappointment associated with the system that rotates caseworkers so frequently that trust and confidence is interrupted. Here follows Amie's comments.  

JOIN THE CONVERSATION ABOUT AYN AND THE MCFD

Please tell your friends to read this blog on a regular basis, to become interested in AYN'S freedom cause presented frequently here and let them know that they can read more at her Facebook page, as well as other web sites dedicated to her campaign to come home, such as THE WEBSITE http://www.justice4ayn.com/
THE BLOG http://freedomforayn.blogspot.com/
Ask them to JOIN THE CONVERSATION.

WHEN AYN IS COMING HOME.

WHEN AYN IS COMING HOME.

THEY CAN’T TALK OR DON’T WANT TO TALK, OR DON’T KNOW.

They are not speaking about it.

Both Derek Hoare and Amie Van Dyk, biological parents of Ayn Van Dyk (she carries her mother’s surname), have not spoken about the delay.

Some months ago, pre-Christmas 2012, Derek updated us with glad information that consultation with the Ministry of Children assured him that with a graduated process and whatever protocol mechanisms MCFD deemed necessary, Ayn would be returned in the near future, early in the new year.

ARCHIVED: ONE WEEK AFTER AYN WAS TAKEN, I WROTE ...

Saturday, June 25, 2011

DEREK HOARE AND HIS DAUGHTER AYN

Did your child ever go missing for a few minutes, for an hour or so? And were you desperate to find the child. Did you contact the police? And when you found the child weren’t you ecstatic and so grateful? So was Derek. But his joy didn’t last long.

His nine year old daughter Ayn Van Dyk, (her mother's surname) was suddenly gone from his backyard at his Mt. Lehman Road home. He had taken numerous precautions for the care of his children. There is a six-foot fence that surrounds his yard. All windows and doors are locked and the doors require a key to exit from the inside. Yet one day recently, Ayn had climbed into her tree house, scaled the wall and disappeared. Derek spent 10 minutes running up and down the street in a rapid search for her and then he called the police who three hours later returned Ayn to her father. She ran to her dad and rapped her arms around him in a tearful embrace. She had been found safe at a pool in the yard of neighbours two house away.

Great! Right? Wrong!

AN APPEAL TO CHILD PROTECTION SOCIAL WORKERS

I once made a public entreaty to social workers engaged in child protection. Here is what I said.

“When you reflect upon the cases in which you are now or have been involved, and if within that list you readily identify families which would benefit from being together rather than apart and you have the means to affect that reconciliation, do all that you can to insure that this happens. So much rests with you. You control destinies. That seems a frightening responsibility.

Anyone occupying a role which owns the weight and the power of the child protection worker within our society, has to have the right stuff if he or she is confidently and effectively to protect the rights of children, safeguard the rights of families and parents and live with a deep contentment at the end of the day. If you see many cases where harm has been inflicted upon innocents, it is understandable that callousness develops toward the responsible caregivers. How discriminating you must be to preserve your own authentic objectivity. How discerning you must be so that can separate fact and evidence from story and assumption. 

You are a member of the public and the public depends upon you front line people to be so careful with your invested power for our sakes, the children among us, children who may require food, opportunity, protection. And by referring to “our sakes” I also intend our families, parents of children, parents who require understanding, a listening ear, parents who require advice & counsel and encouragement, grandparents whose grandchildren are their joys and for whom they hope. Make all of your action choices wisely and be gentle with us please.”

Then, many readers responded of which these are samples.1.     “There is no point appealing to SW as the presence of some good SW, if they ever exist, cannot stop this structural corruption. Nobody will jeopardize their pay cheque, job security and livelihood to uphold justice. Child protection" industry is a racket controlled by a cartel aiming to get rich by ripping off taxpayers at the expense of destroying families. The only way to stop this is by revoking child removal authority and kill CFCSA.”
2.     “Rhetoric that appears radical may not be effective or persuasive. However, revoking child removal authority by killing CFCSA is the only practical solution to end this fiasco and build a safer future for our children. Doing so will not compromise real child protection as there are other laws giving authority to separate abusive parents and children based on good evidence and legal due process. Removing the absolute power to remove will substantially reduce wrongful removal, abuse of power and corruption.”
3.     “The truth about child protection, and all the corruption, is very difficult to articulate because it is so unbelievable. A person tends to sound like a fanatic or lunatic. But just because someone sounds like this, doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth.”
4.     “I had a long history of involvement with MCFD as I was a single parent with multiples and I had a hard time coping with fatigue. Another single mom told me that if I went to my dr. and said I am depressed I could get free childcare. Big mistake!! Many years later they wanted to get me because they thought my son was mentally ill and needed meds so they re-opened a file and claimed 'historical involvement'. It got really weird for quite a while and finally I got my kids back. SO, they do return them. Just keep calm and friendly. Hopefully you are not expected to do a psychological evaluation, as that can be either very good or very bad depending on the doctor. I see now that MCFD was really jerking my chain, as they had no real evidence. They try to bluff you but most of what they write is thin and does not stand up. The case of physical injury is very hard to fight as in SBS. If a medical doctor claims you have physically injured your child, you are in for a long fight. The other stuff should not even be in court and it is a measure they now take to hold the kids until their paperwork catches up. It still can take awhile. I had to wait 4 months without my kids!!! And then there is more work too with all the 'services' they want to give. It is a tough system and all they encourage you to do is to go with their 'services' to a point, as if you do not they make sure you never get your kids back.”

A BRITISH COLUMBIA CHILD WELFARE MYTH

The rights and best interests of children. 

In British Columbia, children have certain rights. They have a right to be made safe in their own homes or in alternative care. Right? When in care they have the following rights.
They have a right to continuity and stability of care. Right?
They have a right to be placed with relatives and to continuing kinship contact. Right?
Young children have a right to timely resolution of their cases. Right?
This means not being left long in damaging limbo. Right?
They have a right to privacy. Right?
They have a right to the protection of the courts from unwarranted removal. Right?
The ministry director has the responsibility to prove his case. Right?
Parents have a right to protect their own children. Right? Wrong on all counts because in practice they get none of these rights.

CRITICISM OF CHILD PROTECTION CAN BE BALANCED

There are cases like Ayn’s where, even the MCFD’s own files cannot possibly justify withholding the child from parents. The seizure and custody of the child is so inherently mistaken and illegal in the moral sense if not judicial, that it can be called iniquitous. And I want to blow the lid off when this happens.