RECAP OF JUDGE WALKER'S LANDMARK RULING AGAINST THE MINISTRY OF CHILDREN IN 2015

My GPS weblog covered in 6 parts the momentous litigation between a mother known as J.P. versus the B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development. She sued MCFD and won in July 2015.  Hers was a case in which her children were removed from her and given into the care of her husband whom it was alleged had sexually abused them. Justice Paul Walker not only condemned the Ministry but awarded the custody of the children to their mother. Here follows my synopsized version of Judge Walker's 140-page judgement.

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 1 of 6 - Strickland and Tymkow

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 2 of 6 - Closed Minds

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 3 of 6 - Unsupervised Access

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 4 of 6 - First Trial

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 5 of 6 - Trial Two

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 6 of 6 - More Findings

Additional to the 6 part analysis of Judge Walker's ruling, two GPS blog posts comment further to GPS: JUDGE WALKER'S DECISION AGAINST THE MINISTRY OF MCFD … News sources jumped on this story that Judge Paul Walker ruled that the Ministry failed to protect children from sexual abuse by their father, … and GPS: JUSTICE PAUL WALKER STUNNING JUDGEMENT concerns the shock waves caused by the ruling.

As stunning and scathing as it was, the B.C. government has appealed the judgement. It also assigned Bob Plecas to do an independent review. He completed and published that report before year end again MCFD is judged wanting in some areas. Read Plecas' full report here.

A CBC News report headlined the report this way. B.C. child protection system slammed for lack of accountability, leadership, funding - British Columbia - CBC News

The Appeal results are still pending and so is compensation for JP.

CANADIAN IMMIGRATION AND SHARIA LAW

Symbol of Sharia. crescent moon & Venus star

I said yesterday that Canada as a culture has made a perceptible shift to the Left and this is demonstrated with the election of the current Liberal federal government. The Liberal policy agenda became attractive to a majority. This government will make decisions from the Left of Centre on vital issues in 2016 and beyond. Furthermore I vaguely expressed apprehension about some issues and the choices to be made. Today I am expressing one specific area of uneasiness.

It is an Immigration and Sharia Law item.

2016 & CRUCIAL CANADIAN DECISIONS

Canada is fortunate. I am a grateful Canadian. We have government by the people. Regardless of which political party is in power, we are governed by democratic principles. I am persuaded that within the Liberal caucus are responsible and honorable people. Government by the people is respected by them and applied in my best interests. As 2015 closes out I am concerned. I'm not alarmist.  Noticeably, in Canada as in the USA the shift has been to the Left when articulating ideals and morality. It is from the Left that heavyweight decisions are being made and will be made as 2016 dawns.

RAY FERRIS ABOUT DR. COLBOURNE AND SHAKEN BABIES

Ray Ferris is a retired child-protection worker and the author of The Art of Child Protection, and an occasional contributor here. 

When I say that Dr. Colbourne is on the warpath again, most of you will not know what I mean. So let me explain about the shaken baby syndrome.

Doctors who believe in the shaken baby syndrome hypothesis claim that when three medical symptoms are present, they can only be explained by a shaken baby opinion.  They claim that when these injuries occur to an infant that they can tell the cause of injury. They claim, they could only happen because the baby has been shaken. Hence the acronym of SBS syndrome. The reason why such an allegation is especially damaging is that it is an automatic allegation that an injury has been deliberately inflicted and is thus criminal and proof that the parent is unfit. Well you can see for yourselves that if the hypothesis is incorrect, that it can result in horrible wrongs being done to parents and other caregivers.

B.C. child protection system slammed for lack of accountability, leadership, funding - British Columbia - CBC News

Find the CBC article with this titled link - B.C. child protection system slammed for lack of accountability, leadership, funding - British Columbia - CBC News

Read the full report

You can download and save the entire PDF of the Plecas Report

B.C. CHILD PROTECTION SERVICE IS UNSAFE

You will remember that in 2015, a judge ruled in the favour of a mother who filed suit against the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Hers was a case in which her children were removed from her and given into the care of her husband whom it was alleged had sexually abused them. Justice Paul Walker not only condemned the Ministry but awarded the custody of the children to their mother. 

former Deputy Minister Bob Plecas, now independent Reviewer

The government sadly refused to go down without a face saving fight, and said they would launch an independent review of the Ministry essentially hoping that said review would dispute the judge’s opinions. Bob Plecas was given that task. Now CBC news has reported that Bob Plecas fulfilled his mandate and delivered his review of the Ministry of Children and Family Development. It does appear that he did maintain his independence because it does not make a pleasant read for the Ministry leadership.  You can read the full report from Bob Plecas.

RAY FERRIS LETTER TO THE EDITOR ABOUT PLECAS

Bob Plecas

If you didn’t know or haven’t read it, please read CBC’s article on Bob Plecas criticism of the Ministry of Children and Family Development. This is not what Premier Clark expected.

B.C. child protection system slammed for lack of accountability, leadership, funding

Ray Ferris, former employee of the Ministry of Children and Family Development, and now determined critic of that same ministry had written on Tuesday, December 15, 2015 11:08 AM a letter to the editor of the Times Colonist, and the subject was Bob Plecas.

DANNY FRANCIS IS DEAD & SO ARE SOME OTHERS

The Ministry of Children and Family Services is in the news again. Every few weeks another story breaks. This time MCFD's regrettable connection may relate to legislation as opposed to case management. The case? Danny Francis. 18 years old. Dead. By his own hand. That is enough to grab our attention. Now consider that three other teenage children also committed suicide within past months, and each one was a ward of the system. The occasioning factor of their suicides? A couple of them were ageing out of Ministry care. These have received government care, foster parenting or financial support, benefits … and with the changing of a calendar date, it's gone. Now they are gone. The desperation of these young people has to be the subject of an official inquiry of course, but a few people with a salary will have to make policy and legislation that better equips children in the CPS system so they are not overcome by loneliness and hopelessness.

There is so much more to each of these four youths' stories. Will reviews ever care enough?

LEGALLY KIDNAPPED & CARLOS MORALES

The video was published on Oct 14, 2015 and is found at this YouTube site.

Please watch CPS Whistleblower, Carlos Morales, tell you truths about Child Protective Services, using his reference sources and stats in the USA. Proportionately, these are similar in Canada. He will make a case for the abolition of CPS moving it beyond government oversight in order to produce a freer society. 
You can find the book "Legally Kidnapped: The Case Against Child Protective Services," at Carlos' website here. Unlike anything ever published, he tells what families should do to protect themselves from this monolithic agency that has destroyed the lives of children & parents. Parents across the country have already used his legal recommendations and saved not only thousands of dollars on lawyer fees, but also protected the future of their family. It is imperative that people understand Child Protective Services in order to save their families, and this book accomplishes that in a gripping and thought provoking manner. Take a look.

You can buy the book, "Legally Kidnapped" here. It's $8 hard copy and $2.59 Kindle.

Y

PRECISE COMMUNICATION IN A HANDFUL OF WORDS

Putting my words on a diet. I manage several blog pages. I generate too many words. Users read only 20% to 28% of the words in an average Web page. Even high-literacy users scan and often only the beginning. Readers don't read very much. I have decided to put my word count on a strict diet. They'll have to work hard for survival.

Front loading my Ideas. Since users spend 80% of their time on the top end of the page, I will start with the conclusion. I must insure that the first lines pack a summary punch. I'll limit paragraphs to one idea. I will use bulleted lists & meaningful sub-headings. I have assumed photos attract attention. Not so much, unless, the image contains relevant information.

Credibility is crucial. A good reputation works in my favour. Users know they can trust my copy and they know I write carefully and well. Since I've done my homework, I offer links to others sites.

That's my intention in an ever-increasing glut of information.

SAMANTHA LAUREN MARTIN June 4, 1993 - December 3, 2006

Velvet Martin (Samantha’s mom)

Samantha Martin

This is placed here today in memory of Samantha, about whom I have written before.  Samantha's death coupled with her mother Velvet's tenacity secured passage of Samantha's Law, a Canadian child protection law.

Samantha Lauren Martin June 4, 1993 - December 3, 2006

With a song by Avril Lavigne here is an informative video tribute that celebrates both the importance of Life and also the loving memory of this young girl named Samantha Lauren Martin. It describes her brief life and the objective of her natural parents who missed having her in their home for most of her life. This article explains the reasons for that. Her mother has sought a Fatality Inquiry as well as personal closure. Samantha's death inspired Samantha's Law.

(this is an archived file from a Toronto Sun article from 2011)

SOCIAL WORKERS NEED CHILD-PROTECTION TRAINING

This is an opinion piece by my colleague and guest writer, Ray Ferris appeared in The Times Colonist. Ray sent it to me after it was published there. whom you know as the author of 'The Art of Child Protection,' and as a frequent contributor here, as well as an advisor to countless parents as well as lawyer and members of parliament. You can order the book at rtferris@telus.net

The Walker judgement and several others have made it evident that an adversarial and even hostile culture permeates the ministry responsible for child protection. There are probable causes for this. One is that provincial social workers used to be responsible for both financial assistance and child welfare. The deep-seated antagonism to assistance applicants rubbed off on child welfare cases, often the same cases. The three children’s aid societies were kinder, because they handled no assistance. All services were amalgamated by the first NDP government.

The courts used to function well. In the late seventies I studied about 200 cases which went through the Victoria court. No cases exceeded statutory time guidelines and judges were vigilant in demanding proper notices and other parental protections. Only four cases went to contested hearings. Most cases were settled by negotiation. There were many registered social workers and there was a sense of professionalism among the staff members.

WALKER'S SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 6 of 6 - Continued … More findings

This is my synopsized prose version of Justice Walker's 140-page judgement presented in several segments that reveal the substance of Walker's overview of evidence that demanded his verdict against the Ministry of Children's Child Protection. No stated opinion or fact appears here that does not also appear in the Justice Walker's ruling (legal document). It is public information

The Ministry failed to carry out its obligations to protect the children from harm and to act in their best interests, yet the fault cannot be attributed to a single Ministry employee.  Rather, many opportunities arose for the Director to conduct a proper assessment and investigation of the reports of sexual abuse. She frequently received evidence and other information and different employees were at fault at different stages for various reasons. What is compellingly obvious is that the Director and her agents formed their opinions prematurely, before the children were interviewed, and so concluded that J.P. fabricated her report information and there really was not merit to her allegations of sexual abuse by the children's father.

Most startling is the fact that until the 64th day of the First Trial, the Director maintained this view that the allegations were groundless and that J.P. was unfit to parent. Then the Director changed her mind. Nevertheless, the Director supported B.G.’s claim for custody of the children and to the detriment of the children, unreasonably preserved that plan until March 29, 2012.

Justice Walker did determine that B.G. sexually abused P.G., the youngest child, at the time that the Director allowed him unsupervised access. The Director has exhibited lack of regard for directions from this court as well as for her obligation to present candid, full disclosure to the Court during the Apprehension Proceeding. The Province is responsible in law to pay for any damages suffered as a result, and is liable for special costs of the first trial.

When finally the children were returned to their mother, the Director thwarted the plaintiffs’ request for funds from another branch of the provincial government that provides compensation to victims of criminal acts. The plaintiffs proved this.

Walker's SCATHING INDICTMENT - Part 5 of 6 - Trial Two

This is my synopsized prose version of Justice Walker's 140-page judgement presented in several segments that reveal the substance of Walker's overview of evidence that demanded his verdict against the Ministry of Children's Child Protection. No stated opinion or fact appears here that does not also appear in the Justice Walker's ruling (legal document). It is public information

In Trial Two the plaintiffs sought damages based on the tort of misfeasance, alleging intentional and reckless misconduct by the Director and her agents acting in breach of the standard of care as well as fiduciary duty, being motivated by bad faith and malice. The same claim for costs was made at first trial but put over to the second trial. More specifically in Trail Two plaintiffs claimed that the Director and her agents failed to protect the children from B.G.; failed to investigate reports of sexual and physical abuse; wrongfully apprehended the children from their mother; unreasonably held the unjustifiable belief that J.P. was unfit to parent; ignored Court orders; abandoned statutory obligations. The result has been ongoing emotional harm to the children from abuse by B.G. and from being withheld from their mother for two and one-half years. Further, while in the care of the Director the youngest child, P.G. was sexually abused because of the unsupervised access.  

In Justice Walker's Second Trial judgement, for ease of reference, he referred to the Director and her agents as the “Director”. The Director and the Ministry cannot be sued. Therefore, the defendant was the Province of British Columbia since the Province is responsible for the Director and the Ministry. The Province denied any basis for a finding of misfeasance, asserting that the Director fulfilled all common law and statutory duties to the children. B.G. denied all claims against him.  Judge Walker in his ruling certainly disagreed. He determined that the infant plaintiffs established the liability of the Province for negligence and breach of fiduciary duty owed to them. The plaintiffs, including J.P., also proved the misfeasance claim. Judge Walker determined that the Director and certain Ministry social workers acted well outside of their statutory mandate and the duty to protect children and that the nature of their libelous handling of the case varied depending on the individual. It ranged from intentional misconduct, bad faith, reckless disregard for their obligation to protect children, breach of the applicable standard of care to unreasonably supporting the custodial interests of the children’s father even if it meant he sexually abused them.