CHRISTIE'S FINAL SUBMISSION installment 7of10 Berhe, Humeny, Glen / 495

New to this? Paul and Zabeth Bayne's 3 children have been in court ordered foster care since Oct 22, 2007. On March 2, 2011 a judge ruled ongoing care for 6 more months (recently altered to 3 months).
Lawyer Doug Christie's final SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE to Finn Jensen's closing summation was delivered on behalf of the Baynes on November 4, 2010. Yesterday you read points 15-17 and today in Christie's own words, it is.... Submissions and Analysis, points 18-20 beginning, "First the testimony of team leader Mr. Berhe Gulbot." This is the seventh installment in a brief series of quotations from this public document. 

REPORT OF THE HEARING RE: JOSIAH CUSTODY

Acknowledgement: Four individuals supplied me with accounts of Friday's court proceeding. Thank you.

Surrey Provincial Court Building Entrance

Preface: This was a hearing specific to Josiah Bayne, who is now several weeks old and who was removed from his parents' custody on the day of his birth February 10, 2011. His three siblings are the subject of a case that was decided on March 2, 2011 with an outcome that they remain in foster care for six months. The case files for all three Bayne children have been transferred from the Hope Team to the Guildford (Surrey) Team and Matthew Walker is now the primary caseworker with the Bayne family. On this day the court was to hear and make a ruling on MCFD's application for an Interim Custody Order for Josiah. Loren Humeny (Hope Office) has been the primary case worker for the past 3.5 years and he was present to give testimony. Paul Bayne whose failure to testify during the 2010 court case was noted by Judge Crabtree, did testify today, as did Zabeth. Doug Christie was present to represent the Bayne family.

I KNOW YOU CAN DO THIS/ Part 350 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

I know foster parents personally. Over a period of many years I have watched these foster parents that I know do a praiseworthy job of raising someone else's children. I know adoptive parents whose families have been comprised of children born to someone else yet who were integrated with such love that it was seamless. I applaud excellent foster parents and superior adoptive parents. They transform unfortunate life events into redemptive rescues and recoveries.

This blogsite is not designed to castigate or demean foster or adoptive parents and families.

I know competent social workers who dedicate themselves to effective responsible work. Knowing them has caused me to conclude that the dominant motivation for people who embark upon a career in social work is the unmistakable desire to help people with social needs. They desire and they receive training to provide a variety of resources to people with social difficulties within the target population in which they work. They have access to and they may collaborate with other social care organizations and government institutions as mediators and consultants.

We are all proud of our province

This blogsite is not designed to rebuke or humiliate social workers whether at the front line or in a supervisory role.

Listen, I could do this all day. I know as friends, doctors and lawyers and people in law enforcement and I am certain that almost everyone who enters these professions do so with laudable intentions. This blog is not designed to reprimand or offend any who spend their lives in these fields.

However, it may sometimes appear that this blog is merely a vehicle for disseminating vitriol to scar people employed in positions to which I have alluded above, because child protection activities at the heart of these daily written communications have bred such wrath and anguish, not in me personally, but in those for whom and about whom I write. Further, my thoughts provide opportunity for the wounded to respond and they do, often with words directed like a scatter gun at everyone in the fields related to their damaged lives. Everyone who is suspected of being responsible for disrupting and interfering and even ruining a family becomes a target for a verbal blast.

You see, I also know personally, people whose children should never have been held from their parents for as long a period as has been the case. I know parents who have not received from social workers a respect and compassion we would associate with their professions. I know parents who have been handled with disinterest, discourtesy and cruelty by healthcare and legal and law enforcement persons.

So you will have to excuse what appears to be an occasional outburst or an overstep of civility because YOU HAVE NOT BEEN LISTENING. Ms. Polak, Ms. Du Toit, Ms. Turpel-Lafond, Mr. Campbell, Mr. de Jong, Mr. McNeill, Mr. Fitzimmons, Mr. Jensen, Mr. Gulbot, Mr. Humeny, there are parents and children who are not being heard. Attention must be paid to a countless number of parents who are powerless to recover their families because an entire ministry and legal system is charged with a mandate that can be deemed counter productive to the objectives of these disenfranchised parents. In so many of these cases, the best interests of the children is being misunderstood and misinterpreted. I am begging you to begin to listen to their heart cries. This province needs to become proactive, a trail blazer in reform of child protection policy and practice. I know that you can do this.

MCFD HAS A VESTED INTEREST IN SBS / Part 267 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne/

Before you begin, I apologize for the length of this piece.

Here is something to think about. As you know by now, the MCFD did not, and does not accept Paul's and Zabeth's denial of inflicting harm on their third child nor their explanation of a domestic accident that involved a toddler sibling and the infant daughter in an impact collision, one child falling on the other, head against head. Dr. Colbourne diagnosed a probable shaken baby syndrome origin for the child's injuries in 2007. She made that assessment based upon her knowledge and experience. She then did what she must do in the event of such a diagnosis and that was to notify the MCFD. The MCFD accepted her diagnosis not merely as probable cause but the definitive cause of the girl's injuries. Today, twenty eight months after removing all three children, MCFD cites in its affidavit in support of a Continuing Care Order that it rests its case soundly upon Dr. Colbourne's conclusion.

Social Worker Loren Humeny's recorded notes submitted in court indicate that in 2007 Dr. Colbourne was almost certain that this was a shaking 'type' of injury. Her own testimony clarifies that she believed that it was distinctly a shaking injury and her 2009 in court testimony expressed that it was an impact/shaking induced injury. During that two year interval the National Center for Shaken Baby added 'impact' as a causal link to shaking. Further, NCSBS changed the name from shaken baby syndrome to 'traumatic head injury', which implies impact. Ongoing research revealed that unless there is an underlying illness, impact is necessary to effect this type of injury. The organization that claimed this type of injury is caused by shaking now incorporated 'impact' into its definition. Even so, those making this diagnosis punctuate felony rather than accepting accidental cause. I am not saying that the linkage of shaking and impact are inaccurate. I am saying that it may be unwise to assume that a specific constellation of signs and symptoms are always the result of criminality rather than accident. See  White Paper: Shaken Baby Syndrome/Abusive Head Trauma Prevention

Neither Dr. Colbourne nor MCFD has accepted the association between the Baynes' impact accident story and the altered SBS causation which now accommodates to impact.

Dr. Colbourne was for some time listed on the international board of directors for the Center and that relationship was actual at the time that the Bayne children were apprehended. Dr. Colbourne's name was removed from the Center's web page some time in the past two years.

MCFD encourages training of caseworkers on the subject of SBS. MCFD's website states: "...Team members have completed a number of other MCFD sponsored educational and training courses, including sessions on Shaken Baby Syndrome, Alternative Dispute Resolution, Mediation, Attachment Theory and Community Living Services." This is available in the report called Director's Case Practice Audit Report, Vancouver Coastal Region, Pemberton Integrated Family Services RYH 2009.

Berhe Gulbot has been a key MCFD figure associated with the apprehension and ongoing custody of the three Bayne children and he himself has testified that he was one of the Ministry personnel who attended the Shaken Baby Conference organized by the National Center For Shaken Baby in Oct 2007. The Ministry believes in and trusts this theory and has injected ??? dollars into the promotion of this theory. I have sought to read both sides of this controversial diagnosis and I surmise that it may be foolhardy to rest reputations on a theory with a growing discreditation. There is an avalanche of contradictory medical and expert opinions concerning the value and validity of SBS. That it can be disputed bothers me because hundreds of children have been removed from their parents on the basis of this theory with the resultant affects in some cases of criminal prosecution and conviction. Presently, 1500 people are serving sentences in the United States because they were convicted on the basis of this impugnable theory. How many have been convicted in Canada? And even if not convicted because there was insufficient evidence as far as the RCMP was concerned, how many children have been taken away forever? MCFD wants to do this with the Bayne children. That to me will be the ultimate injustice.

Be perfectly clear. I believe that people who shake, impact or harm a child are responsible before the law because this is a grievous act of violence against a vulnerable person. I approve and respect every program designed to prevent such abusive conduct. I believe that the MCFD must become more discerning about SBS diagnoses to consider the variant possibilities so that inaccurate accusations do not destroy innocent families.

Zabeth and Paul Bayne – Part 57 – The Bayne Campaign for Justice

Fraser Regional Office Emails

The problem with private email these days is that there is no guarantee that it will remain private. As soon as personal notes become electronic a large measure of control is relinquished. Email can be discovered and made public. Some times that is unpleasant. The disclosure in this post illustrates the suspicions and the adversarial posture of a section of the Ministry of Children and Family Development toward Paul and Zabeth Bayne as they have sought for over two years to recover three children and have refused to acknowledge a crime of abuse to their baby. It underscores to me how a Ministry loses focus and instead of improving the dialogue that will bring a family together once again, withdraws and entrenches for the contest.

Here is March 2008 correspondence between Ministry of Children officials that I found on the website of Voices of Children Alliance (VOCA). I don’t know anything about VOCA. I wasn't looking for it. It was simply there. I googled something related to the Bayne name. Anyone can do it. The officials in this mail exchange are John Fitzimmons (Community Services Manager); Bruce McNeill (Director, Integrated Practice, Fraser Regional Office; Berhe Gulbot (Team Leader for Hope/Agassiz - CF & CS Office); Loren Humeny (Social Worker, Hope and Area). The subject of their brief interaction is an expressed concern about heightened publicity around the Bayne case attributed to the many Bayne supporters/protestors who were making regular and public demand for the return of the children. The emails appear to reveal that the aforementioned people construed the genuine moral support of these friends as mere publicity in preparation for a lawsuit by the Baynes against the MCFD.

On March 26, 2008 at 2:05 PM Loren Humeny wrote to Berhe Gulbot on the subject ‘Bayne File.’

“Hello John, I am writing this e-mail to bring you up to date of this case as it seems to be going in the direction of a possible law suite against the Ministry.”

On March 27, 2008 at 10:54 AM, Berhe Gulbot wrote to John Fitzsimmons and copied to Loren Humeny about the Bayne File.

“I would like to update you regarding the Bayne case. I asked Loren to write email regarding this case. Loren's email has more details for your reading. The purpose of this update is to inform you of the continued high profile nature of this case, the potential for parents complaining to higher management or Victoria, unconfirmed reports that parents are thinking of suing the Ministry and that they are asking people to support them by attending at the Chilliwack court in the next court hearing and may be invite media.
I strongly suggest that you review the file and respond to me if you have any suggestions that we need to take action.”

And on March 27, 2008 at 11:33 AM John Fitzsimmons wrote to Bruce McNeill and copied to Berhe Gulbot and Loren Humeny on the subject: Bayne file possible future media involvement.

“I'm forwarding this to you Bruce so you are aware of this file in case there is future media attention. Berhe and Loren have spoken with me about this file on a number of occasions and the case planning has been through. “
Unfortunately, this family has been challenging to work with, there has been little in the way of an explanation for the baby's injuries, and a lot of medical evidence which indicates Shaken Baby Syndrome.
There is little that I can suggest to Loren and Berhe that they might do which they are not already doing. If you would like to discuss this further or would like some detailed information in case of any possible media involvement please let me know....thanks”
John Fitzsimmons
Community Services Manager
Mission, Fraser Cascades
#201- 7364 Home Street
Mission, B.C. V2V 3Y7
PH: (604) 820-4300
Cell:(604) 217-4194
FAX: (604) 820-4311
John.Fitzsimmons@gov.bc.ca

I plead for the MCFD regional office and personnel to return to discussion with Paul and Zabeth for the purposes of putting this family back together again. That must still be seen as the most commendable future for these children.

Hit this link and sign the petition to return the children to mommy and daddy.