GOOD VISIT WITH DEREK TODAY

I am delighted to have visited Derek Hoare today and spent a couple of hours in discussion with him about this social and bureaucratic dilemma in which he and his family have been plunged. His two sons were a treat to meet. Wyatt is courteous, intelligent, conversant and pleasant to be with. Lyric is, well, lyrical with occasional high-pitched voice, enjoyable energy, warm to his father’s hands-on touches, comfortable to be with. His autism manifests softly, differently from his sister Ayn’s more aggressive behavior.  Wyatt listened to our conversation, fully apprised of his father’s ongoing efforts to have his daughter Ayn returned to him. Wyatt will occasionally offer a comment appropriate to the moment. With the resources and assistance that the government can agree to provide I am convinced that not only can this dad care for Ayn better than anyone else on this globe but I am also certain that she should no longer be in foster care under the supervision of the Ministry of Children (MCFD).

PAUL CORBY NEEDS A NEW HEART

I received an e-letter from Karen Corby today. Likely many hundreds did as well. It was sent by Change.org, a petition site from which appeals are sent frequently for worthy causes. I tend to be apprehensive about blanket communications like these. This story appears to be authentic. I blogged Karen Corby’s name and numerous links were immediately available, not least of which were major network news writers taking her story of her son to the public.

In brief, her son 23-year old son Paul is autistic and he is so unwell that he is in need of a heart transplant. The Corbys learned this in 2008, and Paul’s condition has been serious for the past four years. In 2011 they  were told it was time for a heart transplant. That didn’t happen in 2011. The reason it did not happen has become the story. It may not happen at all unless Karen can succeed in her cause.

PEOPLE-POWERED RESISTANCE TO A SOCIAL DISASTER

PEOPLE-POWERED RESISTANCE TO A SOCIAL DISASTER. 

Our governing parties change with elections but the child protection system and its operators remain. The commissioning of new ministers and deputy ministers with each election or subsequent cabinet shuffle does not mean that child protection will be managed differently or better. New players may enter the picture with the best of intentions but the learning curve is steep and the CP practices habits and patterns so deeply rooted in bureaucratic concrete there is seldom anything more than self-serving appraisals and reports. Almost never have people on the inside of the Ministry of Children become spokespersons for correction and reform of bad or unfair practice. Yet it is from such people that the light must shine forth. They are the ones upon whom a community depends if we are ever to put child protection on the right track. In fact, we will have to create new standards in order to recover from what I deem to be a disaster.

Audio Recording of EBM & SI Conference

For those who attended the Conference or those who missed it and wanted to hear the recordings of certain sessions, these are now available.

Evidence Based Medicine And Social Investigation Conference (EBMSI) · 

Audio recordings of the EBMSI 2012 conference are now available. Orders can be sent to 18217 56 Ave. Surrey BC V3S 7Z2. For the low price of $20 you get the entire conference on a USB Drive and the pdf presentations of Dr. Plunkett, Dr. Galaznik and Dr. Lloyd.

AN 'AYN' COLLAGE OF MEMORIES

She is a delightful girl. Ayn is ten years old now. An entire year has passed since the Ministry of Children and Family Services took her from her father's care. It was not a necessary removal even by MCFD standards. It was an unnecessary reaction to a situation in which a girl wandered from home for three hours and a father became livid when social workers appeared with a voluntary release paper for him to sign. How surprising is it really that an autistic child might try to explore her family neighbourhood? How surprising is it that a diligent dad will show hostility when social workers or anyone wants to take his child?

Photo Collage Credit: Jean Nicol

When receiving expressions of concern about a child from educators, neighbours or any observer, is it always necessary to remove the child from parental custody and care before conducting a thorough investigation? I do not believe that it is. Investigation of Ayn's care by her father and investigation of her health and her home and her living conditions and her nutrition could so easily have been done without an immediate removal. Investigation of her father's parenting capacity could have been affected without removing Ayn from the home. Asking questions about Derek's and Aime's divorce and Aime's endorsement of Derek as primary caregiver to the children did not require Ayn to be in a hospital or a foster home. Opting for the default protocol of removing the child first was a regrettable social work decision. All the assessments required to file a report could have been done without this apprehension which social workers know from experience always extends into months and too frequently into years.

Ayn was not in need of protection. She had not been neglected. She was not evidencing ill health or bruises or discontent. Were any of Ayn's bizarre autistic behaviours inconsistent with her place on the spectrum? Probably not. Was she thriving? I am sure that could have been determined by professionals while allowing her to remain with her family. Was it reasonable to assume that a more effective assessment of her thriving quotient could be made by provoking the trauma of removing her from the people who mean the most to her? I don't believe it was reasonable.

This is one of those cases that gives child protection a bad name. This child did not need protection from her father or her two brothers or her mother. What she needed was for MCFD with all its resources and resource people, to come alongside her and her dad and this family unit with two autistic children and help them to function and to flourish as an effective child-rearing family unit to the satisfaction of MCFD. Pour the money into the family rather than creating a fractured family and pouring the money into a foster family account. Build Derek's confidence and self-esteem with support rather than depreciating his energies and spirit.

A man or a woman have to be remarkably strong in character to endure and to survive the missteps and the mismanagement of an entire department of the British Columbia government. Paul and Zabeth Bayne have been that durable and resilient. Derek will also tenaciously hold on, because he is a committed and responsible father to his four children. All who know him, commend his determination and performance as a dad. But the unanswered, perhaps unanswerable questions, are why does such a well equipped ministry with so many well intentioned people predictably make decisions about people's lives which all of the rest of us clearly perceive to be mistaken. And, why when ministry personnel know the time, cost, trauma, and pain that will be done to a family, is this repeated time after time? 

VIDEO - VANCOUVER SUMMER RALLY

It was in front of the Art Gallery on Robson St. this past Monday August 6th. A significant public expression of concern and protest was made in downtown Vancouver.  In attendance were some of the courageous people who also attended the Evidence Based Medicine and Social Investigation Conferenceonference and whom it was my privilege to meet. Some of them came from other provinces to listen and to speak. Their own lives have been impacted negatively by the intervention of child protection services that has mistaken its mandate. Children have been withheld from parents, been permanently removed and adopted to other families, or have even died while within CPS care. Each story is heart-wrenching. The video is placed here with appreciation to Papa INBC, a profound critic of B.C. Ministry of Children and an encouraging ally of insulted parents.

2012 Summer Rally - Vancouver - tap this link for the video

In the video you will also see Derek Hoare, daddy of Ayn Van Dyk, the autistic child being held currently by the Ministry of Children in B.C. Good for him. He is a capable father, a responsible man, who has a commendable reputation among good people who know him. Child Protective Services needs to take the action that is reasonable now. Rather than associating admission of error or mistake, MCFD must give the child back now, if only for the best interest of the child. It's the right thing to do.

FIRST DAY REPORT ON CONFERENCE

I will let a colleague advocate speak for many of us who attended the first day of the Evidence-Based Medicine & Social Investigation Conference since he had already posted a comment in the public forum of Facebook. Papa Inc is the acronym by which this spokesperson is known to online readers. Papa Inc stands for People Assisting Parents Association. 


The remark was this ... "Investigation conference has completed with four very inspiring speakers: Sue Luttner (Writer and SBS researcher)Velvet Martin (Samantha's Law in Alberta) and Linda Plourde (Protecting Canadian Children), Dr. Patrick Barnes (Medical Imaging Brain Injuries) Dr. John Lloyd (Biomechanics debunks SBS).

Velvet Martin with picture of daughter Samantha

I'm impressed, and there is still one day 

and five more presenters to go. These are highly qualified, talented professionals who were very well prepared, and confident in their message. Those of us fighting those who would harm at take our children should take heart in the knowledge there are people with remarkable communication skills and talent, right here alongside us doing their part, using their time, talent and money to contribute.

Dr. Patrick Barnes

I want to express my appreciation and thanks for their contributions. This includes Paul and Zabeth Baynes who continue to pull out all stops to bring us this great conference, now, a second year in a row!"


* You can read Velvet Martin's story about her daughter Samantha at my Blog site at this title, 'SAMANTHA LAUREN MARTIN - COURT RESUMES TODAY." It's only part of the story and this entry was written March 18, 2011.

EVIDENCE-BASED CONFERENCE STARTS TODAY

The 2nd Annual Evidence-Based Medicine & Social Investigation Conference begins this morning. This is a two-day conference.

The topics of presentations are attractive. This morning at 9:30 AM Mark Freeman speaks on ‘The Civil Rights of Parents Accused of Abusing Their Children.’ At 11:00 AM Sue Luttner will address the subject of ‘It’s All in the Timing: A Quick History of the SBS Literature’, SBS referring to Shaken Baby Syndrome. The latter condition being the diagnosis applied to the infant child of Paul and Zabeth Bayne back in September 2007. SBS has conventionally been applied to all cases in which a triad of distinguishable medical factors were present. It has by virtue of its name implied instantly the commission of an act of violence by someone in whose care the child has resided directly prior to the factors becoming apparent. The diagnosis has resulted in charges laid, convictions and incarcerations of many people in Canada and the United States and other countries. I mention the Baynes because this conference is the result of their commitment to justice not only in their own case but for the countless numbers of cases of families interrupted by a wrong diagnosis or accusation. Their research and their contact with experts in various medical and scientific fields led to the first conference last year. In their own case, due to insufficient evidence, charges were dropped soon after their children were seized in 2007 yet they labored devotedly and honourably for four years to restore their family. Last August 2011 their four children were returned to them following a judge’s ruling that discarded the SBS opinion. The Baynes’ motivation for this ambitious conference is distinct from laying blame or pointing fingers but rather to providing medical professionals, parents and the general public with information that can assist the delivery of evidence-based medical work and judicious counsel. In addition to the public presentations, appointments can be scheduled for private consultations with these presenters. Conference information including schedule, costs and speakers bios is available on the Conference website. The Baynes have also for the past several years compiled the data to be found on another fact-filled and powerful aid to justice and medical information, the website called Medical Misdiagnosis Research.

For anyone still wanting to show up during the next two days, it is located here:

Pacific Life Bible College

15030-66 A Avenue

Surrey, BC V3S 2A5

tap address to view the map

SOMEONE ANONYMOUS WROTE CRITICALLY

An Anonymous writer left a provocative comment some weeks ago on one of my posts entitled "QUESTIONS CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS SHOULD ASK THEM...". Within that paragraph were some thoughts and questions with which you may want to engage.

The writer asked a question concerning the work of child protection social workers with respect to removing children from their parental homes. “The one question I can ask is why are there more removals per year (minimum 1-year incarceration) than there are supervision orders (3-6 month expiry)?” That is an insightful question that might be met with the standard answer that time is of the essence in protecting a child and delay with legalities would jeopardize the child. Anticipating this platitude, the writer states, “The basic tenant of the CFCSA is '...no less disruptive action before removal...' Then why do workers jump immediately to removal before even considering services and supervision orders first?”

Such an interesting analogy is then drawn and points made. “Social workers are as generic and interchangeable as fast food employees, but far more dangerous. Imagine a burger-flipper deciding for the customer (a child) by viewing their physical appearance (too fat?) they change the order and deliver a healthy salad instead. This event would become a national news story and become viral on Youtube if it happened.”

The writer sounds like someone who is either interested enough in this subject to take some initiative or is involved with the Ministry for personal reasons. “I asked workers some of these questions. The generic answer is 'we do what we do to keep your children safe according to the CFCSA.' Under that umbrella, no matter WHAT they do, they consider is 'good' for the child. (Parent's, well, that is another story. They are essentially convicted perpetrators, no longer parents if social workers have been assigned to their case.)”

Then the writer draws a comparison between social work and school teaching with regard to ratio comparatives to children as well as the time that each professional spends with a child. “There is practically a 1:1 relationship to a removed child (and associated family members) and a social worker employee in B.C. (2,600 workers in B.C., and 3,000 children removed yearly). There are 3,300 foster homes. Social worker time is spent preparing for removal, or dealing with the aftermath of removal and preparing for court and arranging visitations. Once children are permanently in custody, or long periods of time elapse between court date, social worker interaction is very much reduced.  The teacher-child ratio is very much different case. There are 550,000 students in B.C. and 30,000 teachers. Yet, teachers spend at least 5 hours each weekday with students. Social workers interact no more than a few minutes a week with parent or child.

The question to these workers that I would be asking is, exactly what are they doing with their time if it is not spending that with the people they purport to serve? ”

Then the writer draws personal conclusions, one being explanatory and the last being understandably sardonic.

‘My thought is these workers DO ask themselves these questions continuously. They know the correct answer to provide, so the exercise of their employment is to somehow make it appear the duty they are charged with is so vitally important to our society, the annoying details of how they go about that task becomes a distant secondary consideration.

So, the silent answer to all these questions is, you had better shut up and let them do their jobs. That primary job is removing and "caring" for children at exorbitant cost to the public.’

A SOCIAL WORKER'S APPROACH TO HER WORK

I want to introduce you to Alison. She has written here before, a long time ago, actually Dec 12, 2010. It was a piece entitled "IN ALISON'S OWN WORDS / Part 396 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne 


Alison was not directly related to the case of Zabeth and Paul Bayne and their desperate but relentless endeavour to recover their four children so that they could live their lives as a family. Alison showed interest in the Baynes. Alison was completing her training to qualify as a social worker for the Ministry of Children and Family Development, the same Ministry that was holding the four Bayne children pending the outcome of a court case and then pending the cooperative interaction between MCFD and the Baynes as ordered by Judge Crabtree. Alison is one of numerous reasons why I hold a balanced approach to my assessment of this Ministry. As critical of the MCFD as I believe I have reason be, there is a need for vulnerable and helpless children to be protected from environments, conditions and people who threaten their safety and thriving survival. Alison affords the confidence that I require to know that there are dependable people who do work with parents for the best outcomes of children within the contexts of improved families. She restores my trust in a government agency being able to discern parental competency and integrity as opposed to genuine risk for children. 


She recently wrote a comment in response to a post that I put up on SUNDAY, JUNE 3, 2012, entitled QUESTIONS CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES


I read her words and I know that this deserves to be more widely read so I am placing it here as a post. 

She has written what follows. It is worth a careful read. Thank you Alison.

"Alison has left a new comment on your post "QUESTIONS CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS SHOULD ASK THEM...": 
Interesting list of questions, however they're not exactly the questions I consider when working with families in a protective capacity. My questions are informed by Andrew Turnell and Steve Edwards' work, Signs of Safety (http://www.signsofsafety.net/). I would edit your list of questions as follows:
1. What is my distinctive role in this child's life? In other words, why am I here?
What's the danger statement? What was the unsafe thing that happened that we don't want to see happen again? This is more about the caregiver than the child.
2. What am I observing and to what am I listening as I monitor this case, this family, and the interplay of family members? What can I smell or perceive that may call for a possible assessment and inform that assessment. What dangers are apparent or what hygiene issues meet my eye?
I'm done with danger & risks by now. Now I'm asking, what are the exceptions to risk in this family? What are the strengths, how do they already come up with solutions?
3. Are there other workers who have been involved in this case? If there were some others, what were their observations and what do the case files already indicate? Can other workers assist my understanding with relevant information?
Sure, past workers interpretations are important, but more important to me is, how did the family, the community experience those other workers? Did the caregivers find the other workers helpful? If not, maybe I want to form my own opinion, independently of past negative biases. Also, maybe the family doesn't have the same problem as in the past, or it's less severe. Maybe the children are older now.
4. If I decide that there is cause for concern in this case, what are the things that I believe require change in order to relieve the concern? What action plan transparent to all the adults involved, can result in the best outcome and what time frame is best?
This is a good premise for ongoing work with the family, but it's missing the family's input, other than it be transparent to them. What changes can we agree on? What actions does the family want to take? If the family doesn't agree, how could there possibly be lasting change? I think of this as aligning with the family.  

I did my Signs of Safety training with Ktunaxa Kinbasket CFSS, from the Cranbrook area (http://www.signsofsafety.net/british-columbia).