THE COUNTDOWN HAS BEGUN

 Nine days until the TCO comes to its conclusion, that is, the end of the temporary care order applying to Ayn Van Dyk, daughter of Amie Van Dyk and Derek Hoare. Expectation is high that twelve-year-old Ayn will be returned to one of the parents, likely Amie. If that outcome is realized, one extended family will be ecstatic with a range of emotions, and a phalanx of supporters on several continents will be thrilled.

In that case I wonder what Hon. Stephanie Cadieux will think about the Ministry of Children and Family Development of which she is the Minister in charge. An individual case is customarily not a priority for a Minister but Ayn’s case will have come to her attention. It’s a unique case. It’s a distasteful case.

It’s true that Ayn’s case did not transpire during Hon. Cadieux’s watch and she came into office late in this girl’s saga but if she has apprised herself at all about the details, she will know how this story is perceived by responsible readers of facts. Ayn was taken for an apparent reason, that Derek, the sole caregiver at the time, could not manage the parental responsibility of this disruptive and unpredictable autistic child. I described it as an apparent reason, because conscientious fact-finding would have assured a diligent investigator that Derek, if not perfect, was an effective and loving parent. He was also caring for two of Ayn’s siblings, older brothers, one of whom is also autistic. That’s right. Ayn is autistic. Sizeable commitment to be sure, but Derek viewed Ayn’s behaviour as entirely predictable and her disruptions when they occurred were manageable through his conversational persuasion. He was the Ayn Whisperer.

She was at home and happy, and she was also curious, understandably so, because she was autistic, and as an autistic child sometimes does, or, any child does, she scaled the backyard fence one afternoon and explored her neighbourhood. She didn’t venture far. The RCMP found her at a nearby neighbour’s yard. Derek felt he had no option but to call for help when he couldn’t locate her. But of course, RCMP must make reports, and the Ms. Cadieux’s Ministry was called in, before it was Ms. Cadieux’s ministry, and the administrator and social workers expected Derek to voluntarily sign a release form to let them take Ayn from him. Even if this appropriation was temporary, he was opposed to it, vehemently to say the least. So MCFD affected a surreptitious seizure of the child while she was at school. This was in June of 2011.

You read that date correctly. Even if Ayn was taken so she could be examined medically, socially and psychologically, even Hon. Cadieux will have to admit that three years is an excessive examination period and I would add, an unwarranted length of time to keep the child from her family and in the care of strangers who become simulated family. It doesn’t matter how positive the foster parenting has been, the conduct of the Ministry in this case is reprehensible, inexcusable. If Hon Stephanie Cadieux wants to make a significant mark on this Ministry during the brief time she holds this portfolio, because Ministers get switched around with frequency, I recommend that she delve with determination into the reasons why there are numerous cases of children being removed and then withheld from responsible parents and grandparents for extended times, and then meet that inquiry with suitable procedures to return children speedily. Perhaps she can expedite an unraveling of the mystery of red tape so that twelve-year-old girls do not miss three years of their lives with those who love them most.

Derek and Amie do not live together. Their marriage dissolved years ago, but with mutual respect Amie supported Derek’s single parenting of all three children. There is much that I do not know, but I am assuming Amie will be thrilled to see her daughter released from government care, even if she is returned to Derek. If the judge, on the recommendation of MCFD, rules that Ayn be returned to Amie, and Amie is able and willing, as I believe she is, that may be a wise step as this young woman enters her teen years. I trust that Derek will acknowledge the wisdom of such a move. Furthermore, I trust as well that both parents will find ways of allowing these children to see each other frequently. The countdown of days has begun again.

DOUG CHRISTIE, HUSBAND, FATHER, FRIEND & LAWYER - DEAD AT 66

He was a defender of Free Speech.

Christie is one of the most recognized and provocative lawyers in Canada.

Doug Christie died on Monday at Victoria's Royal Jubilee Hospital at the age of 66. “I am heart-broken to say that Doug passed away this afternoon in Victoria Hospice,” his wife Keltie Zubko announced in a public statement. She said that Doug’s family was with him and were “able to say all that was in our hearts to say before he let go of the pain and suffering to leave us with the immense gifts of his love for us and the lessons of his life.”

I had difficulty understanding why he defended the people he did. Then I met him, spoke with him, watched him within the context of his legal work done for Paul and Zabeth Bayne as they tried for four years to recover their children from the Ministry of Children and Family Development of British Columbia, and my appreciation for the man began to develop. He represented the Baynes pro bono and that benevolence spoke volumes to me. I am sure that some of his motivation derived from his Roman Catholic convictions. I liked him. I am saddened by his death. The Bayne family is together today in large part because of his dedicated assistance to their campaign for justice.

CRIMINALS AND LAWBREAKERS

Today's post has been contributed by Ray Ferris who provides occasional and always informed and helpful counsel to parents who seek him out for advice to deal with the personal crises they are encountering when dealing with the social service agency known as the Ministry of Children and Family Development. Today he deals with the Justice/Law and this is worth the time to read it.

What is the difference between a criminal and a lawbreaker? Is it just a term, or is there a real difference? Well it seems to me that lawbreaker is a generic term, which applies to anyone who breaks any law, but a criminal must specifically break the criminal law. We know what happens to criminals, because they go to prison, or get fined, or put on probation. Some countries put them to death.

What about all the other laws which are not criminal. Civil law and administrative law? What happens to breakers of these laws and who are typical lawbreakers? Well we know all about speeding tickets and parking fines. We know all about income tax penalties and divorce and custody orders. There can be unpleasant consequences if you fail to pay maintenance or fail to return a child on a court ordered access visit.

Do we find lawbreakers in family court in child protection cases?

FORMULAIC LEGAL REPRESENTATION / Part 291 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Mr. Finn Jensen sought to convincingly present to the Court the Ministry's case that one parent is or both parents are a continuing risk to their children for which reason, they should not be awarded custody of those children. Jensen's presentation was based upon the Director's affidavit that expressly based its case on Dr. Colbourne's medical diagnosis. As I interpret the court case development, when the shaken child insinuation became shaky because the diagnosis itself is controversial and the evidence against either Bayne is non existent, Jensen employed other approaches.

Zabeth, under cross-examination by Jensen was squeezed to extract information that might be construed as admission that Paul had alone time with his several week old infant and he might have hurt her. Zabeth gave Jensen nothing. Then, of course, Jensen did the unthinkable. What was a loving confidence between husband and wife and shared with only a few others, her new pregnancy, mistakenly disclosed or clandestinely pirated to Jensen became for him a cruel instrument. He knew the effect it could have. The method is formulaic. When a counsel can make a witness come unglued or display behaviour that casts doubt upon emotional control and stability, it is easier to assert incapacity to care for children. He posed questions that evoked from her, what else, truthful responses. Yes, she and Paul have always loved children. Yes they wanted a large family. Yes they had considered enlarging their family. And then, “Are you pregnant now?” “Yes,” she said. She cried. A young woman, happily pregnant, had been made to feel soiled, guilty. Caught in the act of being with child.

This is the adversarial nature of the Court Room. The weapon was dulled at the moment of impact by the unified abhorrence of a full court room.  So Jensen's propositions continued. Whether Zabeth agreed or not, Jensen expressed questions to the Court that inferred that after three years without children in her home, and with the significant demands of a newborn, she and Paul would surely not be able to adequately care for these children. If he thought that his sails filled just then with a desirable breeze, Zabeth closed her trial by shredding the sails with her valiant and forceful final words.

Zabeth and Paul Bayne – Part 50 – The Bayne Campaign for Justice

PRAYER, LAW AND POLITICS and a CHRISTMAS GIFT

Believe me, I understand if you are not someone who considers prayer an effective or necessary resource.

I am assuming that because you are sympathetic to the Baynes or even a committed advocate for the return of Kent, Baden and Bethany to their mommy and daddy, Paul and Zabeth, you don’t mind if other advocates pray about this dilemma. Whatever works, right?

I received a message yesterday from a pastor in McBride, B.C. telling me that he has been notifying his congregation regularly about Paul and Zabeth Bayne and the church folk are praying for this family. Their prayer covers all the necessary touch points, Zabeth’s and Paul’s emotional health as this ordeal drags on, the children’s protection within the government protection program, and not least, the restoration of this family unit. When I learned that they are praying that the children will be returned by Christmas I quickly sent out a note to some colleagues. I discovered that numerous people have been praying this same prayer about a Christmas return for some days and weeks. They know that it will require a miracle. I suppose that’s why prayer is the vital response. It connects with the one being who is not miracle challenged.

I know that praying presupposes that Someone is listening. May I jump the theological cue of questions for evidence and presume for a moment that God does exist and is interested and involved with us. The Preamble of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) articulates this truth by stating that “Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.” That being the case, I am making an appeal to people who pray. Will you please join these others in praying for a Christmas gift. As someone mentioned to me, the Baynes will not only be celebrating the arrival of the celebrated Child Jesus, but the arrival of three children with whom they have not lived since they were two months, two years and three years old. What a gala Christmas this will be!

Pray that the Ministry of Children and Family Development will make this significant decision to return the Bayne children permanently to Paul and Zabeth by Christmas 2009.

Tap this line & Please sign this Online Petition.
As soon as you provide your name, it is recorded.
A Donation page appears but you just EXIT the program. This donation request comes from the website designers not the Bayne Team.