MCFD'S DELIBERATE EVASION OF APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE

MCFD'S DELIBERATE EVASION OF APPROPRIATE PROCEDURE

SS is the 3-year old Metis girl who lived with upstanding Metis foster parents in BC since she was 3 days old. These parents wanted to adopt her. MCFD had other plans and waited 3 years to enact them. In order to accomplish the removal of SS from her B.C. foster parents' home and send her to another foster home in Ontario, the Ministry of Children and Family Development purposely, one might say deliberately, took numerous questionable actions. You will read about them here. An unnamed friend has written the following points that I deem to be worth considering.

MCFD purposely disregarded every criterion for assessing a child’s best interests as specified in B.C. legislation and in the B.C. College of Social Workers Standards of Practice;

MCFD purposely disregarded the rights of the birth parents and their written preferences to which attention should be given as specified in B.C. legislation and in the B.C. College of Social Workers Standards of Practice;

MCFD purposely disregarded the written position of the B.C. Metis Federation that opposed the move;

MCFD purposely disregarded specialized opinions of medical and psychological professionals who advised against the move;

MCFD purposely disregarded the excellent record of care by the BC foster family, and the child’s superior development during her first three years with her foster family;

The MCFD fabricated charges against the foster parents, and created sham procedures by which to justify intolerable delays in finalizing a permanent placement for the child, by moving her from her psychological family in B.C. to another foster home with strangers in Ontario.

The MCFD procedure began as an adoption to the Ontario family until faced with the law forbidding this, and ultimately called placement with new foster parents;

MCFD in spite of the move being a fostering relationship have insisted that the child refer to the new foster parents as “mommy and daddy,” while insisting that her de facto psychological parents in B.C. be referred to only by their first names.

MCFD's confused bureaucratic manoeuvrings validated by B.C. Courts, gives the appearance that the Courts are complicit in this flawed and insulting treatment of a vulnerable child.

MCFD ERRED IN MÉTIS CHILD'S CASE

This is the complete document containing four earlier segments that demonstrate how MCFD purposed to send SS from B.C. to ONT., regardless of regulations that should have prevented this action.

MCFD ERRED IN MÉTIS CHILD'S CASE

What influenced the Director of the Ministry of Children and Family Development to arrive at the decision to remove an almost three-year-old girl named SS from her Métis foster parents in B.C. with whom she has been since birth, in order to send her to live with non-Metis parents in Ontario, where her two Métis siblings live? Let's begin with the foundation that each of the two placement options in this case, the BC home and the Ontario home are good homes for this child.

That last sentence may reveal the decisive factor, the genealogical kinship. In this child's case you may agree that it was not enough to justify MCFD's choice. Using the Ministry's own legislated and documented criteria for determining placements, I will now tell you why the MCFD decision was unreasonable, and not in the child's best interests.

First, the regulation states that preference is shown for a placement that permits a child's contact with birth parents in order to enrich the child's sense of identity, provided that birth parents welcome the contact. A beneficial relationship was already established between the child and the birth parents in the same B.C. city during the three years she has lived with the Metis foster parents in B.C. In fact, these birth parents in B.C. are open and have repeatedly begged that the foster parents be allowed to adopt their child. Distance makes it impossible to maintain such quality contact with the family in Ontario and no attempt was made by either Ontario foster parents or birth parents.

Second, consideration is given to the child's physical, intellectual, and emotional needs and to her level of development. A professional appraisal revealed that irreparable damage would result to these aspects of the child's life if a move involved this significant trauma of removal from the foster family and a move to strangers in Ontario. In her B.C. foster home these needs were met for the first thirty months and her development progressed above norms.

Third, is the importance of continuity in care.  In the child's B.C. home, her continuity of care was uninterrupted until MCFD removed her in preparation for her transport to Ontario. That interruption was justified in the belief that the long term benefits of three sisters together will outweigh the loss of these formative years.  

Fourth, is the importance of a positive relationship with a parent as well as a secure sense of being a member of the family. SS was firmly established in her B.C. family consisting of foster mom and dad and older grown children. When the decision to move the child was being considered by MCFD and when BC foster parents contested this before the court in 2016, the child had no relationship with the prospective adoptive parents in Ontario or the two older Métis sibling sisters whom SS had never met. There was then and there may still be a high probability that a 'positive relationship' cannot develop with the other sibling girls.

Fifth, is the importance of preserving the child's cultural identity. The Ontario parental couple has not been in a position to preserve Métis culture. In distinction the B.C. foster family are committed to the preservation of the child's Métis identity and have taken steps to encourage this. The B.C. Metis Federation has been active and outspoken in their support of the child being kept with her Métis family and with part of the Métis community in her home province.

Sixth is the preservation of the child's cultural, racial, linguistic and spiritual heritage. The Ontario parents, upright and well intentioned for SS, are not themselves of Métis heritage.  With respect to their two adopted Métis sisters, no evidence exists of a continuing identification with the Métis community. There is no reason to believe that SS can have her heritage preserved in her new home. In the B.C. foster family, LM, the foster mom has Métis cultural heritage, and she and the child were well connected to the B.C. Métis Federation, community life and ceremonies. Furthermore, the Métis birth father is in Victoria and easily accessible.

Seventh, is consideration of the effect on the child because of a delay in making a decision about her future. Delays were created by the MCFD's repeated extensions of a Temporary Care Order (TCO), as though this was a probationary period for the foster parents and the foster child. Yet the child came to LM and RB when she was three days old and was with them for almost three years and no probationary period was required, and she could have been adopted to these foster parents as they requested, except for the Director’s refusal to consider this. 

Eighth, is the Parenting Capacity of each parenting couple. Both parenting couples enjoy reputations as good and responsible parents.  In Ontario, both parents have full-time jobs and the two sibling sisters have special needs. In B.C. both parents are employed full time but at home, and the mother (LM) is certified in ECE and Infant and Toddler Care and Special Needs.

Ninth, consideration is given to the other members of a family, the extended family. I have no information about the Métis sisters' interaction with extended family members of the Ontario family. In the B.C. foster family there are two older sisters and two older brothers.  These sisters are committed to the care of SS and one of them has certification in childcare. One of the brothers is particularly attached to SS and she to him.

Tenth, is the matter of the siblings, and the possible value or merit of seeing all three placed together. Most jurisdictions recognize that when two or more bonded siblings are in need of placement, for whatever unfortunate circumstance, a humane consideration requires that their trauma not be increased by splitting them up into separate homes. This situation does not apply to SS.  The two “biological” sibling sisters were born in Ontario and have been total strangers to SS, who was born in B.C. when her birth parents moved there. One professional opinion states that there is high probability/risk that there will be failure to bond and failure therefore of adoption. In this regard, LM and RB expressed commitment to helping SS meet her siblings when she would be deemed stable in her present B.C. home and able to understand the nature of such a meeting.

Eleventh, is the matter of Territoriality/regionality.  LM and RB as well as the birth parents live in B.C. where the child named SS was born.  The B.C. Adoption Act requires placement of a child in B.C. In order to affect the move to Ontario, MCFD manipulated existing legislation. The only language used by the MCFD for many months was “adoption”. When the Supreme Court ruled that the Adoption Act means what it says, and that adoption of a B.C. child cannot legally occur in another province, and by residents of another province, the MCFD abruptly changed its language to “guardianship” in Ontario, and later to a “foster parent agreement.”  Surprisingly, the B.C. Courts have accepted this deviation by the MCFD. While initially, SS has been sent to Ontario as a foster child with foster parents, the clear intention is that she will be adopted under Ontario Adoption legislation and with that comes loss of control by B.C. Further, the understanding is that B.C. must reimburse Ontario for a monthly supplementary grant to adoptive parents for this out of province sibling. 

SHE IS GONE

SHE IS GONE

I have written about her earlier. The story has been in the news for months. It was not difficult for me to decide which course of action was most appropriate to the child. The bottom line is, she is gone.

She is no longer in B.C. She may soon be out of the news entirely. At three years of age, she is having to learn to live with the shock, the anguish of loss, the fear, the mistrust, the daily changes. She is gone, gone from foster parents who loved her so much that they applied to adopt her, and MCFD flew her to Ontario to be adopted into a Caucasian family in which the girl's two siblings live. She did not know them and had never seen them. 

Little attempt has been made here to understand a culture, the Métis culture, because that is the girl's birth heritage. Does it matter? Of course it does. It does in every other avenue of Canadian life and law and societal correctness. Yet in her case, with her life, that culture has been minimized and we have another instance of bureaucratic initiative misjudging what is truly in the best benefit of the child. Isn't our history full enough with the bad burden of young lives plucked from families and shipped off to a residential schools or to out of province non-aboriginal families and even over the border into the United States? Did we have to repeat this again with this little girl? No we did not.

I will talk about her a lot over the next weeks but first I want you to see her, well, you can't really, because there is a ban on such publication, but what is permitted, I can offer here. Furthermore, I am providing links to new websites that tell her story very well from the viewpoint of the loving foster family who miss her.

In subsequent pieces you will be shocked again, perhaps outraged by what our government has done.

SS IS A METIS CHILD WHO IS IN A MESS

Hon. Stephanie Cadieux

Really? B.C.'s Children's Ministry (MCFD) says she cannot go. Who? Who is she? A  toddler only known as SS. She was not permitted to go to a Métis cultural event being held in her honour. Why would the Métis Federation hold an event to honour her? That's another story. Wow, if you think the first prohibition is an embarrassment for MCFD with respect to political or cultural correctness, then the rest of the story will strike you as an offence. I wish I could call it criminality but the Ministry is all-powerful.

I have told this before but here it is. Since birth SS has been raised by Métis foster parents who want to adopt her. MCFD doesn't have to explain itself but it does not wish to approve this application. Instead MCFD has informed the foster parents that they will remove SS from them, these culturally appropriate caregivers and ship her off to Ontario. Oh it's so stupid. You know I get weary of the Ministry's madness. But of course it can be defended by reason that she will join two siblings in the same Ontario family. The fuller story is that these are non Metis caregivers, non aboriginal. And furthermore, SS had never met nor known the two siblings. The Metis couple who desire to adopt her are the only mom and dad that SS has ever known. She has been raised with a toddler's awareness of Metis culture, sounds and practices, music and foods.

TIMES COLONIST STORY ABOUT THE METIS TODDLER

A FOLLOWUP opinion by Ray Ferris, my advocacy colleague, an experienced former Ministry of Children social worker and author of 'The Art of Child Protection."  Contact the author to order a copy of his book, rtferris@telus.net.

The Times Colonist story of the foster parents trying to adopt a child is a classic example of conflict between the different rights of children. Children’s rights are set out in the Child Family and Community Services Act (CFCSA). Children’s best interests are paramount and include the right to continuity of care and the right to kinship contact. Priority should be given to foster placement with relatives. The Act urges timely decision making for young children. Cultural preservation is urged, especially for people of aboriginal origin.

No individual right is paramount, but some rights become more important as time passes and conflicts can occur. It is then that a balance between rights must be sought, requiring good judgement. Unfortunately, good judgement seems to be a scarce commodity in this ministry.

METI FOSTER PARENTS CONTEST THE RELOCATION OF THEIR METIS FOSTER CHILD

CBC photo of child known as S.S.

This is a highly emotional custody battle. It's playing out in a B.C. Court. The B.C. Ministry of Children have decided to remove a happy Metis toddler from her Metis foster parents who reside on Vancouver Island and relocate her to Ontario to the non Metis couple who are raising the girl's siblings. This two year old has never met her siblings and her biological parents who wish to continue contact also reside on Vancouver Island. Her birth father said, “We love our daughter very, very much. And she needs to stay here. She needs to stay where her home is.” "She's so happy." “The foster parents are amazing. They’re wonderful people,” the birth father added. “I wish they were my own parents in some ways.” ---- Tomorrow an incisive response from Ray Ferris.

SARA JANE WIENS’ LAWSUIT

Isabella would be almost four years old now.  She is dead. In 2011 her mother Sara Jane Wiens was an Ontario resident who had fled to B.C. to escape an abusive ex-boyfriend. Her lawyer Jack Hittrich, says that the B.C. Ministry falsely alleged that Wiens was fleeing a child protection order in Ontario. He customarily has substantial reason for the things he says.

In Hittrich’s words, “She is told that she cannot parent because she poses a risk to this young child…The child is scooped from her. There’s no attempt made to work with her to reunite her with her child. They then completely abdicate their responsibility to monitor the foster home and attend to these injuries.”

Sara Jane Wiens was 21 years old when her baby, two-month-old Isabella was removed from her by MCFD in August 2011 and placed in foster care. At the time, Wiens was deemed unfit to care for Isabella. 21 months later in March 2013, her baby died in her crib while in that care home, a service that the government deemed was in the child's best interests.

For Love and For Justice / Part 116 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

A PROVINCE WITH AN APPETITE FOR CHANGE

What is the potential for parents to create social change in British Columbia’s system of child protection? In a system of child protection like ours which is a mandated design based on power differentials against parents, wouldn’t it be an extraordinary step for parents to be given a voice in reforming what we have? If it were possible to create a research team comprised of parents as co-researchers with professionals associated with child protection, the results might be more beneficial than any of us can imagine. This collegial approach would represent an elevation of the parental voice in the reform process and at the very least would predictably adjust how the child protection group views parents, as more of a resource rather than an obstruction. A transformation seems assured in my ideal world when parents could be seen as colleagues in such a project.

Wouldn’t this make an attention-grabbing study team? Wouldn’t it be a step in the right direction if parents in British Columbia became involved as co-researchers in pivotal decision making steps to enrich the performance of various levels of child protection in our province?

What advice might parents give for crafting a less bureaucratic system of child protection? How might professionals engage in working with parents to effect recommended changes? If you were one of the appointed parents what changes would you seek to make to the child protection system?

A study group of this composition was actually assembled in Ontario. A full description of the rationale, the methodology, the findings, the limitations, a discussion of the implications and a summary are available here, on a site called Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies Journal. The article is called ‘Adjusting the Lens: Parents Create Change in Ontario’s Child Protection System.’ The account of this study was written by Dr. Betty Gallagher who is the Director of Education Services at the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies. I have used some of her phrases to write this blog post.

“Parents were qualified to participate in the study: (1) If they had previously been ordered to participate in child protection services through a court order known as a supervision order. (2) If the supervision order was six months in length or longer. (3) If the family file was open after the amended Child and Family Services Act, 2000. (4) If they had maintained a one-year period free from child protection services. In total eight parents participated in the study.”

“Parents suggested eleven recommendations, all of which were supported by the professional participants. These findings suggest that parents and professionals in this study are like-minded in terms of making changes to the child protection system. Further, the study findings suggest there is a need for social workers and parents to continue their discourse about the protection of children.

Parents made the following recommendations for change to the current child protection system:

1. Have two social workers assigned to a case to avoid prejudiced perceptions about parents.
2. Compile a Parent’s Rights booklet.
3. Engage in cultural diversity training for social work staff.
4. Hold fathers more accountable for family issues.
5. Locate extended family quicker when looking for foster care placements.
6. Design a program to help teen parents and their parents raise children together.
7. Educate young girls early about self respect to prevent involvement in violent relationships.
8. Teach parents about life skills.
9. Put a package together that outlines all of the support programs available to parents and highlight the ones you expect parents to take.
10. Develop a support group so parents can meet to discuss their experiences with other parents.
11.Create safe chat rooms where parents, children and youth can communicate with others who have similar situations.

This was a study and only a study. Did it go anywhere? Ahh, there is the snag.
To have legs, something like this must have the authorization and ownership of the legislators that put the present system into operation.

Artist Peter Etril Snyder is Retiring

UPDATE: this article is dated since it was written originally in 2009 didn’t anticipate Peter’s passing. Peter Etril Snyder, 73, died on Monday August 28, 2017 at Grand River Health Centre, King St W, Kitchener where he was born January 28, 1944.

The content of the following was written to reflect information that was current to the time, and has changed with his passing and the passage of time. It still conveys my appreciation for Peter’s art and for Peter himself.

When I lived in Ontario, Christine and I collected Peter Etril Snyder prints. We could afford the prints and we enjoyed the Old Order Mennonite farming scenes. They still hang in our home as framed prints and collector plates. Now 65 year old Snyder has announced his imminent retirement. While he can never stop painting, he is closing his gallery and will no longer offer reproductions of his paintings. His website will continue to offer the sale of his originals. He will also do commissioned pieces.

His website and recent interviews disclose that some health issues, his age and general lack of energy have made him conclude that this is the right time to relax. I am sorry for his health concerns but I understand that he is being wise. He wants to travel with his wife Marilyn and to enjoy these next years without endangering himself.

Snyder’s career spans forty years and he has enjoyed good success. His paintings are avidly collected by people, corporations and organizations worldwide, including the Canadian Museum of Civilization. One of his paintings, ‘The Homesteaders’, was officially presented to HRH Prince Phillip during a visit to Alberta in 1985. During his career he has also been recognized with an Honourary Doctor of Laws (LL.D.) degree from Wilfred Laurier University and is a Paul Harris Fellow with Rotary International.

His is an interesting and singular story. He was born in 1944 to Mennonite parents. His father moved the family from the traditional farming community into town He held his first exhibition in 1963 at the Mall Gallery in Ottawa. Following his graduation from the Ontario College of Art in 1966 he toured Europe and returned there repeatedly through the years as well as trips to Central and South America and United States. In 1967 he exhibited in Buffalo, NY. 1969. Familiar with the old world values, in 1969 Snyder began to capture the charm and simplicity of Mennonite life on canvas. These subjects found a keen market in the Waterloo region and beyond. He held a one-man show of these Mennonite paintings in Kitchener in 1970. He was fortunate when in 1971 the Industrial Acceptance Corporation (now HSBC Bank Canada) purchased a large number of his paintings. During 1972-1974 he held numerous one man shows throughout Ontario.

1975 was the pivotal year that he opened his own gallery in Waterloo. To open and remain operative for 40 years is a rare accomplishment for active artists. Imagine painting, running and supervising a gallery and essentially working six days each week for most of these past four decades. His gallery will be open until December 31, 2009.

“My niece, Cynthia has taken over my library of images. My hope is that my work and it’s further application does not die with me.”   Peter Etril Snyder

Since Peter Etril Snyder’s passing:
Website: https://snydergallery.com
Cynthia Weber: CYNTHIA WEBSER DESIGN is an extraordinary interior design site. Cynthia is an accredited interior decorator and a member of the Decorators & Designers Association of Canada DDA
Here Cynthia expresses her collaboration with her Uncle Peter and his art.
My interest in developing my design website and managing my own SM branding intrigued him and in 2016 when his website became out of date and needed redesigning he asked me to step in. He wanted people to have a place to come learn about his career, look at his paintings and read what he had written about each piece. I think that goal was achieved very nicely indeed! You can click through to explore the Gallery Website.