Let's Compare the investigative practices of MCFD and RCMP
None of this affords me pleasure. I have all of my life held our
governments and their agencies and law enforcement in high esteem. I have had
little reason to question their integrity and uprightness. This past year
because of my introduction to the injustice suffered by one family I have been
exposed to the scores of other stories close to home and I have grown apprehensive
and dismayed. My research suggests that child protection has lost its way in
every province and if that was not startling enough in every civilized society.
What is equably written here in this blog is blasted out with vehement rhetoric
in newspapers, magazines, online websites and blogs all over the world. I have
developed a unpleasant case of cynicism over these months. I am unsure whether it
is a treatable condition. For the short term, I know I will have relief when
the Baynes get their children back. But what about the thousands of other
children who must stay in care away from the parents with whom they desire to
live and who love them.
 |
| RCMP Coat of Arms |
Similarities between MCFD operations and the deficiencies in RCMP investigations
A pattern of deficiencies in RCMP investigative processes have been uncovered in recent well publicized cases and we recognize some parallels in the way MCFD is processing child protection cases. These are deficiencies have been mentioned:
a. A preset mentality that someone is guilty - MCFD is similarly inclined to form an attitude that the parent(s) is guilty of some kind of abuse or neglect and so does all in their power to produce evidence however insubstantial.
b. Ignoring available evidence or actual evidence that contradicts the preset - Similarly MCFD predictably filters acquired evidence in order to promote that evidence which supports its view of the situation and it has failed to interview available and potential witnesses who would not support the preset mindset.
c. Pressing forward with the prosecution process by laying charges anyway – Similarly MCFD in the Family Court will continue their prosecution or persecution of parents involved to deny them justice and convince the Court of the charges they have against the family. I have witnessed this myself.
Factors in MCFD investigations of families:
a) MCFD says that it takes a forensic approach. This is acceptable provided that a balanced and thorough investigation is conducted in response to allegations, but often allegations have little substance.
b) Typically MCFD looks only for that which is wrong or deficient in a family scenario and places the parenting in the worst possible light ignoring all their admirable points.
c) Often investigators accept the views of those who support allegations while ignoring the advocacy of those who support the family.
d) Interviewing children who are considered at risk often is inferior, while parents may not be interviewed at all prior to the removal of children.
e) Many notifications of concern about children and false allegations against parents are found by MCFD investigation to require no further action.
f) Nevertheless, many investigations are pursued with a purpose to find something significantly wrong in order to justify the previous over-reactive removal of a child or to justify a subsequent removal.
g) The agenda may involve a vindictive attitude against a parent or social engineering bent designed to put the children with more suitable caregivers, (as with the removal of aboriginal children in BC and other provinces).
h) If the initial allegation of abuse proves empty, MCFD will stretch other matters in order to come up with other problematic suggestions like neglect or lack of control.
 |
| This is inevitable and healthy |
