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

AYN'S APPREHENSION WAS UNREASONABLE - WILL THE MINISTER LISTEN?

In June 2011, MCFD’s decision to apprehend Ayn was the result of under-investigation. I believe it was over-reaction rather than over-investigation. Sending out the child protection team was standard procedure following an RCMP involvement in a child-search. However, when social workers arrive unannounced with document in hand, requesting a parent’s signature to a voluntary surrender of a child, without engaging in a sincere discussion of the challenges of parenting an autistic child, and in this specific case, the reasonable explanation for the child’s wandering from home, and possibly as well, asking how the Ministry could actually facilitate Derek’s job of caring for three children, two of whom are autistic, then the MCFD action was flagrantly unreasonable, illogical, unfounded, groundless, senseless and irrational.

THE FIFTH ESTATE SHAKEN BABY FEATURE TONIGHT

When to Watch

Tonight, Friday at 9 p.m. JAN 13

9:30 p.m. in Newfoundland & Labrador (Repeat airtimes)

DIAGNOSIS MURDER

For decades, the diagnosis of shaken baby syndrome virtually guaranteed convictions, shattering the lives of thousands of parents, babysitters and families. Now new evidence questions whether the syndrome even exists, and whether some have been wrongfully convicted.

In a promotional video of an interview this subject is discussed for five minutes – good introduction. Paul and Zabeth Bayne are interviewed.

CBC News: 'Shaken Baby Syndrome?'

Reporter Gillian Findlay sits down with CBC News Network's Heather Hiscox. In the interview, they discuss research that suggests that the widely accepted shaken baby syndrome may actually be a physical impossibility. http://www.cbc.ca/fifth/2011-2012/diagnosismurder/news.html

If you are not in Canada and cannot tune in tonight, the video will be archived online for viewing around the world. And the link will be placed at this blog site.

Gillian Findlay hosts and reports for CBC Television's investigative program, the fifth estate, and she is the principal reporter tonight with video and interviews that have been researched and assembled for many months for tonight awaited feature. Here is her bio. Her colleagues are

Bob McKeown and Linden MacIntyre

 I AM CERTAIN THAT IT IS MERELY COINCIDENCE THAT THIS BROADCAST AIRS ON FRIDAY THE 13TH, ON ONE OF THE DARKEST STORIES OF OUR SOCIETY, WRONGLY ACCCUSED PARENTS AND CAREGIVERS. 

Diagnosis Murder

SCRIPT TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE CBC FIFTH ESTATE SITE.

"It's a scenario as horrifying as it is heartbreaking: a frustrated parent ... a baby that just won't stop crying ... and suddenly, what were tender, cradling arms become instruments of death. At least this is how Shaken Baby Syndrome has been characterized in countless court cases in recent years. But what are the scientific foundations of this diagnosis?

Gillian Findlay examines the conventional wisdom around Shaken Baby Syndrome, discovering that those who question it often feel targeted by those who believe passionately in it.  And yet new science suggests the so-called syndrome may be a physical impossibility.

"Diagnosis Murder" tells the story of several Canadian parents who say they were wrongfully accused--and the leading-edge medical researchers who believe they're telling the truth. The stakes are high: Some have gone to jail. All have had their other children taken away from them.

One couple recently had their children returned after a four-year battle. Even though the courts in B.C. cleared Zabeth and Paul Baynes of charges they had shaken their baby, the couple feel they will carry the stigma for life. Another man in Ontario has now had his case put up for judicial review, giving him hope that his name may too be cleared.

Is Shaken Baby Syndrome conclusive evidence of murder? Or is it a scientific hypothesis that has convicted an untold number of parents as killers -- when their children actually died from other causes?"

'DIAGNOSIS MURDER' ON FIFTH ESTATE FRI JAN 13

FIFTH ESTATE is an award winning CBC television program known for its quality investigative journalism. This coming week, on Friday January 13th at 9 PM Pacific Time, it will air a show to which many of us have looked forward. The show is entitled tile ‘DIAGNOSIS MURDER’ and it is a documentary on the questionable science of Shaken Baby Syndrome. Paul and Zabeth Bayne will be involved in this expose. You will recall that this couple lost custody of their three children with an event that began in September 2007. For two years this blog chronicled their story – the medical diagnosis of their youngest child’s injuries as SBS and the subsequent establishment of a Ministry of Children’s case that one or both of the parents were responsible for those injuries. That unchanging conviction directed the Ministry’s actions for the next four years. RCMP had dropped charges due to insufficient evidence. That did not stop MCFD. We can understand the need to be cautious, even suspicious, and therefore exercise due diligence to ascertain whether these parents are a risk or not, and further whether they deserve and can manage three children if they are returned to them.

Will this be a good documentary? Will it affect any benefits for the Baynes, or for other parents who have been suspected of shaking a child? I have great expectations for this approaching show. My confidence comes from the record of archived Fifth Estate shows and most recently the success of this past week’s show entitled ESCAPE FROM JUSTICE.

THE WAY IT WORKS

Natural parents have full rights over their child unless mitigated by an agreement or court order to the contrary. These rights, known as parental rights are also referred to as custody or guardianship.

Occasionally a parent is unable to cope with parental responsibility and voluntarily turns a child over to the government. By law, in all jurisdictions of Canada there are child protection services, sometimes called child welfare services.  The term 'apprehension' is applied to the government intervention by which a child is removed from the natural parent(s) care, and this is affected by the extraction of all or most of the parental rights from the natural parents, through a quick confirmation by the Court. On this blog we tend to highlight the cases in which the government has taken initiative for a child protection order by which parental rights are set aside temporarily. I cannot underscore boldly enough my objection to the too frequent occurrence of temporary care that ignores court orders and time parameters.

British Columbia's legislation is entitled Child, Family and Community Service Act. In Ontario, the related legislation is the Child and Family Services Act, and, in Alberta, the Child, Youth and Family Enhancement Act. The BC CFCSA is unique in that it personifies the role of the government in child protection cases by a reference to the Director who is a senior public servant in one of the five provincial regions who interestingly seldom becomes involved in individual cases and never appears in court. So in fact, 'Director' means the child protection office or social worker responsible for the file.

HOT OFF THE PRESS - CBC STORY ABOUT THE BAYNES

By CBC News, cbc.ca, Updated: January 3, 2012 10:09 AM

B.C. children spent years in limbo after shaken baby accusation

A couple whose children were removed from their home and eventually returned say the B.C. government caused needless suffering by keeping the family apart for almost four years.
“It’s going to take a lot of healing,” said Zabeth Bayne, mother of the four children. "There’s a lot of pain that gradually we have to deal with, and as a family."
“Children grow up very quickly, and they can’t wait,” said Paul Bayne, the father. “For four years, I couldn’t be a proper dad or provider or a protector. Now I can.”
The Baynes were accused in 2007 of shaking their six-week-old daughter. They’d brought her to hospital with inexplicable injuries, so the B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development took her away.

THE FIFTH ESTATE AND AN SBS DOCUMENTARY IN SEPTEMBER / 596

Gillian Findlay, Bob McKeown, Hana Gartner, Linden MacIntyre

The Fifth Estate has a lengthy record of confronting ethical issues and doing it well. It is a form of journalism and the stories that are tackled have a high risk factor. That is, the people whose stories are told have faced and may still face profound consequences. They voluntarily provide information because they cannot evade the compelling conviction that the stories are too important to remain silent. These are brave people and fortunately Fifth Estate producers and directors are determined to treat these subjects with care.

This September, CBC’s Fifth Estate will air a documentary concerning Shaken Baby Syndrome. To that end, a crew were in attendance at last weekend’s Conference on Evidence Based Medicine and Social Investigation. The venue was advantageous for the producers because Dr. Chris Van Ee and numerous other experts were presenters and were willing to be interviewed.

ALTRUISTIC WORK BY RAY FERRIS AND DOUG CHRISTIE / 595

Doug Christie

Ray Ferris

At last weekend’s conference entitled, EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE AND SOCIAL INVESTIGATION, two of the speakers during the Saturday morning schedule, were Ray Ferris and Doug Christie. These have become friends of mine, casual, men whom I respect. Both of these men as many of you now know, have been instrumental in assisting the Baynes particularly through the course of the multi-months court hearing in 2010. Ray’s knowledge of the Child, Family and Community Services Act, and the operations of the Ministry of Children and Family Development child protection process was immensely helpful to the Baynes as well as to Mr. Christie. Mr. Christie’s courtroom experience, his logic and perceptivity as well as communication skill was crucial to the case outcome.

The Evidence Based Medicine Conference and SBS / 591

The Evidence Based Medicine and Social Investigation Conference 2011, convened August 4, 5 and 6. There were approximately sixty registrants. Many others should have enjoyed the opportunity to dialogue with the guest presenters. There were helpful break and mealtime exchanges between experts and appreciative attendees. Perhaps this will be the first of many such conferences.

I attended the Friday morning sessions of the Conference. I arrived early enough to grab breakfast at a table where Mark Freeman, Patrick Barnes and Harold Buttram were seated and after a quick introduction I listened to their case stories. Mark Freeman spoke to the Conference on Thursday. Law is his second career.

GLORIOUS AND FREE/ Part 365 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Gov. Gen. David Johnston greets

Silver Cross Mother Mabel Girouard,

mother of Chief Warrant Officer 

Robert Girouard,

who was killed by a suicide bomb

in Afghanistan in 2006.

(Pawel Dwulit/Canadian Press)

I, like thousands across this glorious land and free, watched the CBC televised broadcast of ceremonies in Ottawa to commemorate our heroes, the fallen, who loved enough this country and all for which it stands, to fight in the face of danger and ultimately to surrender their lives. Multilingual dignitaries found the words with which to express what this sacrifice has meant to all of us who survive and cherish our lives in this country. CBC again admirably portrayed the event. Cameras permitted us repeatedly to look directly into the faces of soldiers and spectators. We looked into their eyes. The eyes of veterans who were far away and came back. Soldiers whose eyes reflect the loss of comrades. Children's tear-filled eyes as mothers caress small heads in comfort because fathers could not come home alive. Women's eyes, dry now after all these years without their sweethearts who were lost in a distant battle. And CBC captured the music of choirs and bagpipes and bugles against these vivid visuals and cannon volleys punctuated the solemnity with a reminder of the sound of war. 

We are so fortunate. I ask why in this chartered land of freedoms are the freedoms of some withheld? When you commit a violation of law, you justly forfeit certain freedoms. In the defense of people's freedoms, such as children's rights to health and safety, governments must at times confiscate the freedom of those who are under suspicion. That is as it should be and it is understood. But governments or ministries within governments contravene their mandates when suspicion is equated with evidence, when the suspicion is not investigated expeditiously, when rights are withheld indefinitely, and when legal authority is abused at the expense of Canada's citizens.

This is what is observed within the child protection corridors of BC's Ministry of Children and hundreds of B.C.'s law abiding and decent citizens will bear witness to this. While social workers within MCFD at every level may see things differently than me and may even feel an obligation to defend all MCFD action, there must be some SWs who concur that there are frequent trespasses of protocol and propriety. It is important that some of you speak up. The necessary improvements to interactions with family and delivery of services cannot happen without such admissions and admonitions from within.

THE MAJORITY PUBLIC / Part 321 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

What does the public think?

Well the public has only limited information that is true.

Customarily the public has only what comes from a public news source like CBC.

Kathy Tomlinson has completed videod pieces on the Baynes' story well over one year ago and of course much of her information was supplied by the Baynes. They did provide her with verifiable documentation which she had opportunity to review and evaluate. Her videoss were exposes of a sort and critical of the Ministry of Children.

The public does not generally approve of the State removing children from their parents so when a story like this breaks, the expressions are predictable.

CBC encourages comments to its online stories and other readers can approve or disapprove, that is, thumbs up or thumbs down the comments. You should hear a few from,

The April 3, 2009 article called 'Ministry Disregarded Legal Advice to Return Seized Children', which received 102 comments and thousands of hits. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2009/04/03/bc-surrey-parents-fight.html

Trees Are Good wrote: “ This is a disgraceful example of how this government deals with the best interest of our most vulnerable citizens. Even after overwhelming testimony by their own legal counsel, they have still resorted to the political safety of rigid procedure. Return these children to the protection of the people who care about them most now!! Anything less is child abuse by the state!!” 174 thumbs up / 18 thumbs down

Deputy Dawg wrote: “Now if this isn't a winnable lawsuit I don't know what is.. being the father of a two year old I know what I would do to any bureaucracy that kept me from her on an unsubstantiated whim.” 121 thumbs up / 13 thumbs down

Rayser 213 wrote: “The Inmates are Running The Asylum! They can run but they can't hide! Justice Delayed is Justice Denied! When is this Agency going to think of the best interest of the Family & not protect itself from Courts?” 63 thumbs up / 7 thumbs down

ramont wrote: “paul & zabeth, i feel for you sooo much. i went through a painfully similar ordeal in the late eighties. it was horrible. our family has never completely recovered. we all paid a price. we temporarily lost our children, then regained them but with restrictions. we all still cry from the pain and memory. during that era it felt like a witch hunt. our lawyers at the time told us not to go public with it and I've always regretted listening to them. you are better having as many people aware and on your side. when these situations are kept 'private' there is more opportunity for further abuse of authority. all the power to you. do not back down. do not be intimidated. your love and the truth will win out eventually.” 50 thumbs up / 3 thumbs down

Mighty Rearranger wrote: “Wow! These two are getting a lot of airtime on CBC, I think I am getting fed up with the oh so obvious fake looks of concern and please pity poor old me from the mother!” 7 thumbs up / 55 thumbs down

Raphael Alexander wrote: "I hope that the parents get their kids back, and then sue the government for millions. And I hope they get every penny, even if it does come from our tax dollars. Perhaps they can heal after all this is over by suing the incompetence out of the government and squeezing them for every gut-wrenching penny of bureaucratic idiocy. The nanny state has become the child abusers. Hands off Big Brother!" 49 thumbs up / 6 thumbs down

WHEN CHILD PROTECTION IS WARRANTED / Part 313 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

It's the 18th. Then three more days until the last court day of the Bayne case.

A 6 year old boy has been injured many times before. The most recent occasion on September 8th was severe enough that he went to neighbours asking for help. They did the right thing, notified police and child and family services. The boy had a cut on his chin and a broken arm. Further examination has shown numerous other old injuries sustained by this boy, fractures to his ribs, both arms, a foot and the skull. There is speculation that he was beaten with a mop or broom handle. He ran away from home three times in August.

He finally told authorities what was happening to him at home. CFS has since removed the boy from the couple’s care, as well as his 18-month-old half-sister, who did not have any physical injuries. The girl is the daughter of the boy's 24 year old mother and her 32 year old common-law husband. The couple was arrested September 14th. She faces charges of assault causing bodily harm, two counts of aggravated assault, assault with a weapon and assault for earlier incidents between December 2009 and Sept. 8. He is charged with aggravated assault, uttering threats, assault with a weapon, assault and a probation breach for the same period. Each also faces a charge of failing to provide the necessities of life for allegedly not getting the boy medical help.

Now that is why we need both of these agencies, police and child protection in our communities. So as much as we want to and should complain about the abuses resident within systems that have such sweeping powers, let's be real and acknowledge that not all moms and dads or caregivers are responsible or trustworthy.

I don't want to see this mother on my blog site complaining about child services taking her children. Ever!

Video and News Links:
CBC video news report:
Winnipeg Free Press article
Sept 18 Free Press Update

The Bayne Story / Part 304 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Soon compelling documentaries will publicly review the B.C. government's victimization of a five-member family. Victoria is not going to like this. News networks are ready and waiting.

Paul and Zabeth Bayne had it all. They were young. They had love for one another, faith in God, a home and property for children to play on. They had one son whose birth was not easy for Zabeth, and then another son born with the challenges of serious prematurity, born at 25 weeks. Zabeth and Paul had strength, resiliency and determination. They took this child for medical checks several times each week and various services to assist his development were brought into the family home, services to assist with feeding and muscle toning and general health developmental. Their family doctor was pleased with the children's health and the parents' care of their children. And then a daughter was born and their joy was immeasurable. She too had a premature birth.

The Ministry of Children became involved with the Baynes during the first year of their second child's life, prior to the arrival of the baby girl. At his sixth month he was suddenly crying inconsolably and as he squirmed they noticed his arm hung limply. Tests at hospital revealed a fracture. Standard protective procedure you might say. Both parents were questioned. Paul was asked to leave his house for two weeks. A study identified prematurity of bones in the child and Paul was permitted to resume his role at home. But a Bayne file had begun in the MCFD database.

Paul and Zabeth have looked forward to a large and thriving family and they love their children, so the family of five was just beginning their lives together when that determinative day occurred. The new baby was doing well, fed well, slept well – all was well. Of course she, like her brother would contend with the conditions that pertain to premature birth. Then a household accident. Can be perceived as preposterous but then how many similar mishaps have occurred in our homes. This one had serious consequences. One child active and happy fell on the baby resting on a blanket on a carpeted floor where daddy could see her and to whom mommy would soon return from the other room. Zabeth says she saw the fall. You know much of the rest of this story. Within hours their girl's feeding habits changed and other serious signs prompted Paul and Zabeth to take her to local hospitals and clinics without anyone accurately identifying her issues over several days. Then at last the baby was taken to BC Children's Hospital where the brain bleed and other symptoms were noted and the shaken baby syndrome assessment was made.

Even the RCMP needed to investigate a possible case of abuse but closed that down early. The MCFD was loath to discard the SBS and Abuse storyline, even when other medical experts disputed the SBS diagnosis. What you will not know is the archived attitudes, tactics, setups and actions by the local MCFD to sustain the assumption of risk to the children at the hands of their parents or to trip up the parents. I won't bother covering it. Journalists are poised and will be all over this. I am guessing that when these become public, Victoria will not be pleased.

CW WAS A CONTRIBUTOR / Part 291 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

I scrutinize the comments you send to this post. I explained my approach in a post some time ago.

On Wednesday, June 23, 2010 on my post MONITORING THE BLOG / Part 229 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/ I wrote, “The line is thin between reporting verifiable facts and defamatory material. I am depending upon you to exercise caution and integrity when referring to someone while relating a story or illustration. Because anonymous contributors afford me little confidence that they are who they say they are, SW, CW, parent, or that their motives for writing are honorable, on the basis of what they write, I must be trusting, discerning and objective at the same time.”

CW was a regular reader and contributor for many months. Although many of you did not know this person, the person's willingness to identify as a Care or Community Worker and the nature of this person's comments sent you into attack mode. Enough was revealed within his/her comments to convince most of us this was truly a social worker with inside information. I myself found the writer's comments balanced, extremely supportive of the blog's comments that called for change and improvement to the delivery of services by MCFD, and occasionally making points to clarify or correct statement some of you made about MCF data. Many of you didn't want to accept CW's support of any aspect of MCF work.

Among the things that CW wrote were these comments:

1.  “I hope this sight is a catalyst for change too and that once the court-involvement with the Bayne's is over, the discussion continues as you see fit, Ron.” June 23, 2010 8:53 AM
2. “To Anon 11:42 - I am afraid you are spending a lot of time considering my motives and missing the point … I have not once argued there aren't historical or current problems with child protection. I have said the issues which are being portrayed as the majority, are not.”June 23, 2010 9:57 PM
3. Concerning Chris Martell's story, “God bless this family. So so terrible.” June 30, 2010 2:54 PM
4. Thank you, Ron, for the valuable information you are posting. June 30, 2010 1:27 PM
5. One that upset you and me and others concerned the Baynes laying a baby on the floor, something they themselves may have questioned numerous times yet CW wrote: “It was not ok to leave this little girl on the floor - in her condition(age etc), with rambunctious brothers playing nearby. A removable offence? NOT one bit.”

CW has a right to speak forth but not to expect us all to find it palatable. In fact the comment was fair. Hindsight informs that putting the child there was risky but it was not a parental action worthy of child removal.

Characteristic of the contrary remarks that were frequently directed at CW is this example.
To: CW (June 16, 2010 9:01 AM) “Thank you for your prompt reply. I am impressed by your dedication in monitoring this blog, your knowledge in defending the “child protection” industry, your skills in mitigating damage and casting doubt. Your awareness of opposition is above the average of a front line community worker.”

Often CW was required to defend against a misinterpreted statement.

1. Anon 3:11 - I never once said parents are "better off after receiving services." I did say something along the lines of (paraphrasing myself) "those who voluntarily seek services will benefit from them." I said the postings here which are being portrayed the majority - are the minority. Nothing more. Please do not extrapolate.... I can explain this statement further if you wish it.
2. To Anon 12:27 - I think its with you where the burden of proof lays, does it not? Someone else had already mentioned PAPA on this web site before I had. I don't mind if people go to PAPA, they post a lot of important videos and articles. I referred solely to the surveillance section.
3. To Anon 12:18 - I wonder why I would engage in such an exercise with you on this blog - such as you are requesting... I have made my statements. You clearly have evidence you wish to present. By all means do so - I know you are itching... Ray Ferris, a documented former SW, has also stated surveillance, as you suggest it, does not occur... You may read my previous posts and quote when I said "MCFD never" used surveillance as you suggest. I may be wrong in recalling my own posts, but I'd say a good guess is that I said "MCFD does not."

And perhaps that latter comment is the one that I should have been able to recollect before publishing the latest challenge. CW had exhausted this subject of surveillance as far as he/she was concerned. But I didn't remember.
CW signed off a while ago, surprised and disappointed with me for publishing as a post a comment left by an Anonymous someone who challenged CW to respond to a specific issue, namely 'DOES MCFD SPY ON PEOPLE?' By signed off, I mean CW threw in the towel and said he/she would no longer comment on this blog. This Anonymous issued a similar challenge in an earlier post comment section called 'Whose Best Interests?'

CW has a discernible sensitivity. This is not the first time CW was offended and then made up with me and came back. Frankly, I think that the resignation was due to an accumulative affect of recurring exceptions being taken to CW's comments by numerous other writers, who, defensibly, are also very sensitive about the injustices dealt to them.

I have no idea what CW hoped to accomplish by that comment or withdrawal. Was I supposed to be surprised and disappointed? Well, surprised I was. The anonymous comment was sent and would have been published as a comment to a blog post of mine for that day. When I decided to remove that post, the comment still seemed of value enough to me, that I made it the post for the day. Perhaps I should have anticipated that it might offend CW but I didn't. How could I? CW managed other frontal attacks and this comment was eliciting a response. Disappointed? Perhaps a little because my intention was to stir the further engagement of the surveillance topic. Disappointed that CW no longer contributes? Well, sincerely, I try not to hurt people. Weeks of reading my posts should inform someone about that. Candidly, how am I expected to handle an anonymous contributor's fickleness in this impersonal medium.

I am not anonymous. You know who I am.  If a writer attacks me with words, I feel it. That is understandable. CW used initials yet still had a measure of anonymity so it strikes me as plainly silly for CW to feel injured by online comments when the writers do not even know CW, nor do I. I did appreciate the information and viewpoints that CW brought to our interaction. For CW's sake, CW did the right thing. Logged off. But perhaps not the right thing for the rest of us.

Now readers, if you are going to comment, please don't direct it at or to CW. If you have something to say about spying and surveillance by MCFD personnel, in that I would have interest to publish. I think CBC journalist Kathy Tomlinson might also be interested to read these comments.

Who knows, CW may still be commenting under an Anonymous or a pseudonym.

B.C. SUSPENDS PENILE SEX TESTS / Part 263 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Headline news Yesterday.
The CBC headline is “B.C. suspends penile sex tests on young offenders”
Warning: You may be offended by the description of a procedure in my blog today and if you think you might be offended, sign off now.
Proviso: You should not be offended but rather read on so that you can be offended by the Government of British Columbia who were responsible for allowing this procedure as yet one further evidence of the deficit in wisdom within so many departments responsible for helping Children, Youth and Families.

The test is called a penile plethysmograph, and its purpose is to assess young sex offenders and thereby to determine their risk of re-offending after treatment. In theory, that sounds reasonable. This is a male specific test because during the test a device is attached to a youth's penis. His genitals are covered with a sheet during the testing. The device is designed to measure physical sexual arousal. Theoretically the test will predict whether offenders have gained control of their deviant arousal patterns through treatment or if they have not learned how to suppress deviance and will be a strong risk for re-offending. Take into consideration we are discussing testing the libido response of adolescent males. As researchers in an adjoining room monitor the adolescent responses through one way glass, the subject is shown images of adults, youth, children and babies in various states of undress while simultaneously a story is read that describes sexual activity sometimes coercive or forced. If a stimulation effect is noted then a deduction is made that there is some form of sexual deviancy.

QUALITY RESEARCH, RIGHT? NOT! The reliability and validity of this procedure in clinical assessment have not been well established. The premise is clear enough. Show images to a youth that stimulate sexual fantasy or thought and they will accomplish precisely that. That's not research. That's natural. The fact is that the respondent male sexual response may be manifest whether the youth is deviant or not. What an inane quantum leap to assume deviancy from a natural response to titillating provocative scenes that you are responsible for placing before the subject. What a certain way to create yet another scenario of false allegation and injustice! And further, the researches themselves, jaded and experienced as they may be, experienced in life and sexual activity as they may be, may not respond to the same sexual stimuli as readily as a youth, but what if they themselves also experience some arousal on the other side of that one way glass? That aroused response would not attest to deviancy would it?

Here we go once again. The tests are conducted by Youth Forensic Psychiatric Services, part of the Ministry for Children and Family Development. (Go to the link above and explore the left column index). The psychiatric service comes under the authority of the ministry for Children and Family Services and on any given day, there are up to 1,300 B.C. youth aged 12 to 17 involved in the service, of which 75 to 125 are sex offenders. In the interest of protecting society and helping or penalizing the offenders within it, we have a ministry and professionals condoning a procedure that is inherently questionable, repugnant to many, improper even to many liberated and objective observers, then being discovered, disclosed, chided and embarrassed. Robert Holmes, the president of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association revealed this practice this week demanded that the government intervene after it learned of the tests  (you will find a lot of reading at this BCCLA link).

When she learned this she jumped on it. Within hours of the provincial advocate for children and youth Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond raising concerns with senior ministry officials, the government suspended the sex testing. Yesterday she announced she would conduct a review and she said, "It is extremely upsetting to me, as a children's' representative....I doubt there's a judge in B.C. who has any idea that adolescents being referred to this service (by the courts) are being shown pornographic material while having a device attached to their penis... They have assured me this testing is not happening at the moment and they will not continue this testing until my office has completed a review of the matter. … I think we're going to look very carefully at the balancing of the rights of the youth, their vulnerability, the process that was used," she said. "Is this a necessary tool? Is it valuable? I think we're really going to have to look at all of the key issues with this." Of course Mary Polak must seek to explain what on earth her Ministry is thinking so she said, "The ministry relies on the advice of medical professionals and clinical practitioners with regard to research and therapeutic intervention as it relates to the treatment of youth who have committed — and have been found guilty of — serious sexual offenses.” She also said that she takes the concerns seriously and will co-operate with the review by the Representative for Children and Youth.

Here is the actual explanation of the science behind the penile plethysmograph as presented by the Forensic Psychology Centre in Brisbane.
American Psychiatric Association, have called the test unreliable. 

And if Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond needs a lead, here's one. The Supreme Court of Canada adopted the Daubert doctrine in R. v . J.-L.J. [2000] 2 S.C.R. 600, which upheld a lower court's decision to exclude testimony by a psychiatrist who had administered several tests on the accused, including a penile plethysmograph:

A level of reliability that is quite useful in therapy because it yields some information about a course of treatment is not necessarily sufficiently reliable to be used in a court of law to identify or exclude the accused as a potential perpetrator of an offence. In fact, penile plethysmography has received a mixed reception in Quebec courts: Protection de la jeunesse – 539, [1992] R.J.Q. 1144; R. c. Blondin, [1996] Q.J. No. 3605 (QL) (S.C.); L. Morin and C. Boisclair in "La preuve d'abus sexuel: allégations, déclarations et l'évaluation d'expert" (1992), 23 R.D.U.S. 27. Efforts to use penile plethysmography in the United States as proof of disposition have largely been rejected: People v. John W., 185 Cal.App.3d 801 (1986); Gentry v. State, 443 S.E.2d 667 (Ga. Ct. App. 1994); United States v. Powers, 59 F.3d 1460 (4th Cir. 1995); State v. Spencer, 459 S.E.2d 812 (N.C. App. 1995); J. E. B. Myers et al., "Expert Testimony in Child Sexual Abuse Litigation" (1989), 68 Neb. L. Rev. 1, at pp. 134-35; J. G. Barker and R. J. Howell, "The Plethysmograph: A Review of Recent Literature" (1992), 20 Bull. Am. Acad. of Psychiatry & L. 13.

• See also article by Pamela Fayerman, Vancouver Sun
• And if you think comments on this blog will be critical look at the almost 300 comments on CBC's page.
• Click this link or type in to Google the words, "Mary Polak + penile plethysmography," and you will get lengthy list of potential reading.
  
  

  Then on Friday the 30th we learn that one of the medical technicians who conducted the tests was charged with sexual assault this month, in a case not related to the individual's government work. Mary Polak made that revelation as she shut down the testing at least temporarily.

USE THE MEDIA TO TELL YOUR STORY / Part 262 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Thanks to one of the numerous Anonymous writers of comments I was updated with regard to the Flagg family and I want to insure that you know the rest of the story. I wrote about the Flaggs earlier. You can read my pieces 219 and 220. In Post 251 I encouraged you to read Leah Flagg's blog and sign the petition for reform which she was advocating. I can only hope she will continue this effort now that her own dilemma is over.

Kathy Tomlinson does a commendable job of researching and writing stories in her Go Public CBC feature. She has written about the Baynes in the past on a couple of occasions (1) and (2) and stays in touch with this case. You can be sure that when the Baynes are awarded their children this year, that she will be all over this story. Let's hope that Judge Crabtree also censures MCFD so suprremely that Kathy can spread this flame into an inferno for reform of that which is systemically defective within our Ministry of Children.

Here is the Flagg Family Update from her article “Family gets children back” July 5, 2010, CBC Go Public. All of the yellow font is Kathy's manuscript.

“Leah and Steve Flagg said their problems were also solved after speaking out. The Kamloops couple approached CBC Go Public in April, after they could find no help for their mentally ill adult son.
Leah and Steve Flagg got help for their mentally ill son, and their other children were returned to them.(CBC)
"What we have seen — since the story aired — is that with enough motivation our government can do for its people what it has promised," wrote Leah Flagg.

Flagg and her husband, Steve, had allowed their son to move back into their Kamloops home, even though his violent outbursts put their other children at risk.
Before that, the 19-year-old had been under the care of B.C.'s Ministry of Children and Family Development. He was cut off from those services when he became an adult. His mother said she could find nowhere for him to live, so she brought him home.”
The ministry responded by putting the Flaggs' other three children in foster care. The parents spoke publicly about how this had devastated the family.

"A Ministry of Housing and Social Development manager called us the morning after the story aired," Flagg said. "She has been working closely with me ever since . … With her help, we obtained housing [for the son], and his disability benefits were not delayed.
"The last of [our children] returned to us full time shortly after the story aired, and legal custody is being returned to us.
"We hope to encourage other families to pursue complaints and advocate for change … which will enable greater accountability."

If you have a family situation for which publicity might become a resource that produces a good outcome for you, contact Kathy Tomlinson. She welcomes all such contacts. Submit your story ideas to Kathy Tomlinson at Go Public.

CHRIS MARTELL-DEATH OF A SON / Part 261 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Perhaps you will feel compelled to help Chris Martell and his family.
Chris Martell is committed to the discovery of the facts concerning his son's tragic death. Evander Lee Daniels died in a horrific way on Tuesday June 8^th 2010, so Chris' sorrow and loss is very fresh and raw. My first reference to this horror was in a bulletin post on June 29 entitled Chris Martell. The facts came from CBC and Star Phoenix accounts in Saskatoon. Today's information concentrates on some of Chris' own recent comments to my blog post. It is a complex story. Another CBC story. Jeanette Stewart of The StarPhoenix also wrote articles on June 24th and June 25th.

Chris doesn't want his son's death to be quickly forgotten like a closed file in the Ministry's office. It is not sufficient to simply accept the coroner's verdict of “death by drowning.” Technically that may be appropriate but there is more to this story. This is the way Chris tells his story.

The coroner released this little boy's body to Chris on Friday of that week with a media release that there was extensive type burns which may have contributed to the death. Disturbed by what they saw, the operators of the funeral home summoned Chris to look at the infant's body because there was evidence of third degree burns over the entire body from face and head to toe with the exception of the diapered torso. As Chris himself describes it, because of the condition of the body and the way it had to be wrapped, a white screen was stretched over the casket for viewing that would not reveal all details of the child's fatal injuries.

Chris is unmarried. The mother of his child Evander experienced a not uncommon post birth depression and was unable immediately to care for the child. Since Chris was an enlisted soldier with the U.S. Army, the infant was kindly cared for by a cousin and her husband. When Evander was one year old, Chris returned on leave and during this time he and the boy's mother had a domestic dispute that resulted in a charge issued against him which prevented him from leaving Canada to return to U.S. military duty. Chris explains that because he did not have $5000 for a lawyer to fight what he says was a false charge, he chose to plead guilty and was sentenced to eight months of anger management. He was unaware that the caregiver gave the boy to Social Services because the plan was for the mother who had recovered from her depression and dependencies, to apply for custody of her own son. Chris was alarmed to learn that Evander was in A foster home in Aberdeen, SK which he discovered already had four foster children under the age of three and five children in total. Social Services appeared to make a decision that warrants criticism because it stated that a Native family with three children is overcrowded whereas the non native home mentioned above with five was not considered overcrowded. Social services assured Chris that the boy's safety was not a concern in what SS considered a safe home. Both Chris' extended family and the mother's extended family were considering how to care for Evander. Chris was in favour of letting the boy's mother have a chance to raise the child. The plan was for the birth mother's sister to take the boy until the mother received approval. Meanwhile Chris appealed for a court order for visits to his son.

On the day Evander died, Chris and the birth mother were meeting to discuss with officials why the process was taking so long to arrange. It was already too late.
Chris wants a lawyer to do an inquiry to ascertain the extent of what he perceives as obvious negligence that caused death, both from the aspect of the foster care facility and the Social Services' assessment of the home. To raise money to finance that inquiry he publicized a 150 kilometre walk from Saskatoon to Prince Albert SK. That's what caught the attention of news media earlier. He is scheduling another 125 km walk from Saskatoon to North Battleford on August 5^th concluding on the 6^th, Evander's birthday. In spite of the news coverage and Facebook publicity people have not responded generously and he has raised only $2500 but Chris is grateful to the donors.

I am asking you to consider giving to a Trust Fund.

Chris has informed me that Donations to this cause for an inquiry will be administered by the highly respected lawyer Donald E. Worme, Q.C., I.P.C. He serves as the Trust Fund Trustee. I have learned that Mr. Worme is a member of the Kawacatoose First Nation and practices extensively in criminal law and Aboriginal rights litigation. Donald is a founding member and member in good standing with the Indigenous Bar Association in Canada, a national association of Aboriginal lawyers, where he served as President between 1989 and 1991. He received his Queen’s Counsel appointment in December of 2002 and the Indigenous Peoples Counsel (IPC) appointment in October 2006. Don has been an active Member of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Tribunal since 2001 and is mandated to review decisions and human rights complaints. Don has been selected as one of the top 100 alumni of influence as part of a celebration of achievement at the 100th anniversary of the University of Saskatchewan.

Donations may be sent to the AFFINITY CREDIT UNION, 3315c Fairlight Dr., Saskatoon Saskatchewan, S7M 3Y5, Phone: 934-4000 Fax: 934-5496, for the Evander Daniels or Chris Martell Account - Account #1082122. 

Chris Martell will welcome your email communication if you wish to encourage him or to ask him questions to which he can reply. Write him at chrismartell686@hotmail.com. He also appeals to you to join one or both Facebook pages, one that is Chris' and the other dedicated to his son Evander Lee Daniels Group.

YouTube, a pictorial tribute to Evander Lee Daniels using 'Amazing Grace' music as background. 
Chris speaks to us about his need to raise funds.
The Aboriginal Multi Media Society,staff writer Isha Thompson has written Chris's story in SAGE, Saskatcehwan's Aboriginal News Publication.

RAISE THE FLAGG / Part 251 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

I encourage you to peruse Leah Gainer/Flagg's blog site.

She too is rallying awareness to the issues that surround MCFD methods and practice and she is going a step further. She wants you to sign a petition in support of reforming MCFD.

Leah will tell her own story about the impact of MCFD's incompetent policies and practice in her blog. I have related this story myself. You can read my pieces 219 and 220. She has initiated a petition to enlist your signature encouraging our government to consider the need to reform MCFD. There are presently only 202 signatures listed. Please look it over. She has drafted a statement addressed to Premier Campbell, Minister Mary Polak. If you can agree with it, add your signature. On her site Leah provides a number of other links that you may want to follow. She includes a reference to Paul and Zabeth and their children.

Here is the petition page. "Reform B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development"

Here is one of the CBC stories on this family. This one entitled “Children taken because of mentally ill brother” is written by Kathy Tomlinson. In it she explains what is behind the Flagg's claim that lack of government help for their son put their other children at risk.
A CBC Video gives you another perspective on their story. 

THE FLAGGS OF KAMLOOPS / Part 219 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Are the names Leah and Steve Flagg familiar to you?
They live in Kamloops, B.C. and their family was in the news in April 2010. Their life situation with MCFD does not parallel the Baynes' scenario yet it underscores the necessity for public concern that B.C. services to children, youth, parents and families is in dire need of a great range of modification. I will allude to their story for an important reason right after this reminder.

Paul and Zabeth Bayne will be back in the court room tomorrow, Monday June 14th to hear Judge Crabtree's ruling on their submission for unsupervised access with their children. The Fraser Valley branch of the MCFD know how important this ruling is for the Baynes, and also for MCFD. If Judge Crabtree grants these parents any unsupervised hours, be it an overnight, a day, an afternoon, or an hour, what do you think that is saying about his confidence in the Baynes. The only reason he may not grant them unsupervised visitation is to make unassailable his ruling at the end of the Continuing Court Order trial in August and to protect the Bayne family from any future harassing appeal by MCFD.

And now I briefly recite the Flagg details so that you will pay attention to an important Petition to which most of you will want to affix your signatures.

CBC correspondent Kathy Tomlinson told their story on the National with Peter Mansbridge.

The Flaggs have four children ranging in age from 11-20. The eldest son has brain damage, diagnosed from childhood with severe mental illnesses and stabilized well with medication. At age 13 the boy beat his mother severely and harmed his siblings. He was paranoid, obsessive and violent at home. Steve and Leah made difficult choices to protect their other children and find help for their troubled older son. They placed the boy in the care of the Ministry of Children and Family Development.
He lived in a secure youth residence until he was nineteen at which time the Ministry was no longer responsible for him. Upon his release, the Flaggs could not leave him on his own nor could they find any other community or government agency that could take him. On the street he could hurt himself or someone else. Although he was a threat to their other children, the Flagg parents felt they had no option but to bring him home. Leah then quit her job to be at home and each parent took a turn sleeping at night to protect the family. Within weeks, the home situation deteriorated as the son became unmanageable and the siblings fought and the parents became exhausted. Unable to cope they asked the MCFD for respite and counseling and were given a caregiver to assist them only on the weekends. It was inadequate. Into a Ministry report went this conclusion that none of the children felt safe. THE MINISTRY THEN DECIDED THAT THE YOUNGER CHILDREN NEEDED TO BE REMOVED. In December 2009 social workers together with the RCMP came and took all three of the younger children. Refusing to go to a foster home, the eldest girl stayed with an aunt and the other two were placed in separate foster homes. That night is an horrific memory and the consequences appalling.

Leah told Kathy Tomlinson, "It was heartbreaking. We went between just crying and being devastated to being angry and wanting to fight back — and feeling like we had no power. We had our parental rights taken away from us. And that's all we wanted to do was parent our kids. That's all we wanted when we called for help."

At the time of the CBC report, two of the children had been returned home and the younger son was still in a foster home and receiving counseling because he had a breakdown due to the stress. Initially the eldest son was able to go to the parental home of a friend where the Flaggs believe our government paid $6000 per month for care when conceivably the monies might have been allocated to support the family in ways that would have prevented this traumatic psychological and emotional destruction. Since then the oldest boy went off medication, did street drugs, was arrested for theft and assaulting an officer and is in jail.

PETITION: Leah Gainor Flagg left a comment on my post entitled "OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION / Part 216 /..." and with it an invitation to read and to sign an online petition called "Reform B.C. Ministry of Children and Family Development." She also gave us her website to tell her story.

CBC Photo credit

OF COURSE PEOPLE ARE PAYING ATTENTION / Part 216 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

I have learned that the MCFD is discontented, maybe even distressed with the publicity that is being received by the Bayne Campaign for Justice whether it has been through televised reports, online or hard copy news reports, or information at assorted websites and blogs and the unusual number of emails and correspondence and phone calls from Bayne supporters asking for the return of the children. The copy is always unflattering and critical of course. The phone calls and emails denunciative and demanding. I fully appreciate the frustration felt by social workers and managers of MCFD who principally seek to administer their responsibilities effectively. They want to go home at nights feeling that they have done the right things at the right times. I understand that. And MCFD employees feel that with respect to the Bayne support network no one appears to respect these sincere efforts.

Wouldn't tough-minded public ministry be convenient if everything that one did could be affected under a cloak of confidentiality or silence? That was practiced for years. Checks and balances were deemed necessary, an example of which is the position of Representative of Children and Youth designed to ensure that agencies serving children and youth are providing programs and care with which all of us are satisfied.

I was amused to hear Point #12 among the thirty point Ministry affidavit authored by social workers assigned to this case. I will tell you more about the MCFD affidavit next week. It's not appropriate for me to divulge more now before the Judge makes his ruling next Monday on the Baynes' application for unsupervised access to their children.

Point #12 was a “poor us” statement that had no bearing whatsoever on Baynes' unsupervised access application. It said, “The Baynes have a large following of supporters, often having many of those supporters present during Court hearings and otherwise engaging the Ministry through letters, phone calls, emails, and internet postings which convey many specific details of the Baynes' case and question the Ministry's motives."

What was the point of that? It entertained me because the authors appeared not to grasp that this MCFD Ministry is not beyond questioning. Any time that an agency's actions impinge upon the rights and freedoms of people, other citizens will question and expect reasonable answers. When the optics appear unjust, the questions intensify. And yes indeed people know about this case and feel strongly about it. After all, it was aired nationally as well as provincially by CBC and Global TV news. I have certainly capitalized on the vast network of contacts across the provinces that were afforded to me by the executive position from which I retired. A current total of fifty thousand page hits have been registered since the blog began in October 2009. Each day among the one thousand daily hits are social workers, directors and ministerial staff with the MCFD around the province, present and past caregivers, people with RCMP, people in medical facilities and universities, people from news media, from provincial government offices, from interested agencies in the U.S., and from many, many people in Canada who have been burned by child protection agencies.

This blog as I have said before, is decidedly 'pro return the children,' expressed within a framework of fair play. It may not always seem fair but that is the affect of stating an opinion on a blog. However, because I have invited comments, permitting both dissenting comments and passionate anti-MCFD comments, some significant exchanges occur. For the most part people are respecting civility while responding to one another. Yes people are being informed, challenged, caused to weigh arguments, and perhaps somewhere in the future, making the improvements that will reduce the number of removals and modify public perception. Yes there is publicity around this case.