RESOLVING SYSTEMIC AND NON-SYSTEMIC PROBLEMS IN CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES, Part 7

By Ray Ferris (This piece is one of a series Ray will write here.)

MEDIATION

courtesy www.pa-pa.ca

Mediation is another problem area that needs to be considered. Prior to the enactment of the CF&CSA, discussion, negotiation and mediation were considered to be social work skills. Supervisors would sometimes need to mediate disputes between social workers and clients and this was a much-needed supervisory skill. Mediation is usually most successful when there is no great power differential between the parties. It must also be completely voluntary on both sides.

The legislated mediation often fails for various reasons. First, there is a huge power imbalance between the parent and the social worker. The mediation often takes place when the children have already entered care, and so the parties are already in an adversarial situation. So much so, that some parents feel they need their lawyer present at mediation---even at $2,500 at a time.

Guiding Principles in Doug Christie's Life

Doug Christie's Guiding Principles:

"Freedom of Speech is the one gift you must give to your worst enemies in order to keep it for yourself"

Audi Alteram Partem (Hear Both Sides)

"Pass it on"

I will provide to you hear a link to Marc Lemire's 'The Freedom Blog' which has provided a commendable and moving pictorial and audio tribute to Doug Christie with special reference to his memorial mass. 

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.

FOR PARENTS - INFO & SUGGESTI0NS - How to Help Yourself, Part 3 of 4

INFORMATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR PARENTS WHO ARE INVOLVED WITH CHILD PROTECTION AUTHORITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
Written by Ray Ferris

Part Three of Four
HOW TO HELP YOURSELF

How to help yourself.

There is a lot you can do to help yourself. It helps if you understand the process and what to expect. Any person with a reasonable degree of literacy can research the act. Internet users can simply enter the name of the act (Child, Family and Community Services Act) into a search engine and access it on line and print it. You do not need to know the whole act, but you can quickly learn how some key sections of the act are supposed to work and how they are meant to protect you. You can and should insist on compliance, even if your lawyer wants to be more casual.

FOR PARENTS: INFO & SUGGESTIONS - DO YOU NEED A LAWYER? pat 2 of 4

INFORMATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR PARENTS WHO ARE INVOLVED WITH CHILD PROTECTION AUTHORITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA
Written by Ray Ferris

Part Two of Four
DO YOU NEED A LAWYER?

Do you need a lawyer?
There are both advantages and disadvantages to using a lawyer. If you are in agreement with what the protection workers are doing and you have social workers that you can trust, you probably do not need to use a lawyer. You do have a right to address the court, but you may have to insist on being heard. At least it becomes part of the record. Like any other profession, there can be a great variation from one lawyer to another. They all have different levels of experience and expertise in different fields of law. A lawyer does not have to be experienced in family court to take a case and may not be familiar with how family court operates and with important precedents. Lawyers will vary in diligence and perspicacity and in many other ways. A person with expertise in your field may be far too expensive for your budget. Legal aid lawyers may take the line of least resistance and come ill prepared. So how do you decide on a lawyer?

FOR PARENTS - INFO & SUGGESTIONS - CHILD PROTECTIOIN & THE COURT, part 1 of 4

INFORMATION AND SUGGESTIONS FOR PARENTS WHO ARE INVOLVED WITH CHILD PROTECTION AUTHORITIES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA.
Written by Ray Ferris April 29th 2012.

Part One of Four
THE CHILD PROTECTION AND FAMILY COURT SYSTEM

Introduction.

girlsportguide.com

These notes are aimed at helping people who have recently become involved with the Ministry of Child and family services directly or through others. The information is written in the light of a number of cases coming to me and to other child protection helpers. I have borne in mind many of the most common questions that have been asked me. In writing this, I warn readers that the child protection scene is ugly, not only in British Columbia, but throughout Canada and the whole English speaking world. Unfortunately, I have good grounds for this statement, which is based on contact with numerous cases and with consistent reporting on a number of child protection blogs. I am very blunt about it because I believe that people are better off knowing the stark reality of things, than in harbouring false hopes, only to be disappointed.

DEREK HOARE TALKING ABOUT HIS CASE CONFERENCE – Part 2 of 2

In responding to Derek Hoare's synopsis of his Monday Case Conference, entitled ‘Derek’s Report about Case Conference,’ which is worth reading and was sent to his Facebook friends, I wrote a number of questions. Among them were the following. Derek's response follows each lead question.

I wrote, "The trial dates are indeed distant. Annoyance at MCFD over this is misdirected. Neither the Ministry nor its lawyers control the calendar. The court clerk’s calendar is full of prior scheduled cases. Our B.C. Court system is jam-packed with family related cases. The scheduling of a Hoare/Van Dyk case is dependent upon the availability of a judge, of the Ministry lawyer, of Derek’s lawyer, and of court room facilities. All of these individual schedules must find a harmonized meeting place."

Derek said, “Yes that is correct Ron it was not the ministry who sets the trial date, it is based on the availability of all parties (courts, MCFD, Lawyers, Amie and myself). In this case I believe those are the next available court dates.”

THE TERRIBLE COST IS BORN BY PARENTS AND CHILDREN/ Part 414 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Frankly I don't know what it costs to fight the MCFD to regain custody of your children once they have been apprehended by the Ministry. I know that it has cost the Baynes very much. They had a home and property. Zabeth had a grand piano. That all became tinder in the inferno of conflict for which the Ministry has unlimited monetary ammo.

A number of you will be able to tell me how much it has cost you. And the horrible truth is that in most cases the apprehension is for temporary care. Yet in order to establish your ability and stability as a parent it will cost you money, which is so frequently that of which the parents have the least.

The entailed costs are customarily legal fees paid to a lawyer who knows the protocol and the legalese to converse in court and advise you about next steps. The truth is that the parents usually cannot afford the battle. (Look at the terms I am forced to use to describe this, “fight' and “battle”. )

Then there are other complications for these parents. The BC provincial shelter allowance policy is flawed because some parents require this to care for their family but when the children are removed even for temporary care, part of these monies is held back. The Ministry of Housing and Social Development (MHSD) cuts it off immediately, or at the end of three months, depending on the discretion of social workers assigned to the case. The dispiriting result is that parents are sometimes unable to retain their present housing and then the home to which they move is substandard and is not fit for children. Well guess what, the the Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) is charged with helping parents safely receive their children back from temporary care, so when SWs advise the dropping of the shelter allowance, there is a significant contradiction happening here as in so many other areas of MCFD practice.

And then what? Well, the MCFD objective no longer is the return of the children to parents in that case.

Even in the cases where parents of children in care are granted a three month extension of the shelter allowance, that amount of time is inadequate for resolving the issues that MCFD has with the parents. Delays in process within child welfare and the courts are so common that before one knows it, six months, a year, eighteen months have gone by. Only the deprived parents and their children care. If it is a single parent, a mom on income assistance, just think how difficult it is for her to find housing. She cannot have her children back without good housing. It typically takes two to three years to locate adequate housing. It's around 35% of children taken into care that come from families receiving income assistance and get this, the majority are Aboriginal or single mother families.

With regard to MCFD, Family reunification should be this government’s number one priority. The Liberal Party over the past number of years has not prioritized this, has not funded it and therefore MCFD has diminished staff and resources and increased caseloads and a backed up court schedule has guaranteed that children will stay emotionally and psychologically disoriented within a foster care system for much longer than is either necessary or humane. I guarantee that unless some of you put this to Liberal and NDP party candidates they will not even be thinking about child welfare and protection and family unity.

This Blog has been advocating the return of three children to their biological parents, Paul and Zabeth Bayne, for which a ruling is expected from Judge Crabtree no later than January 19th. Stay posted.

DID YOU KNOW? / Part 345 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

New Leather – Did You Know

Hello, look at your car, now back to mine, now back at yours, now back at mine. Sadly you haven't got a car like mine, but if you were a lawyer representing the Ministry of Children and Family Development you could drive one like mine. Look at my car's emblem, now back up, where are you? You're in a showroom with a person who already owns one of the cars on display. What's in your hand, back at that show car. You need a key that fits the ignition of that new car with which you have fallen in love. Look again, the key is in your hand. Anything is possible when you graduate from law school and become employed by MCFD. I'm in the driver's seat. [Smell like new leather. Be an MCFD lawyer]

Old Spice – The Man your man could smell like

“Hello, ladies, look at your man, now back to me, now back at your man, now back to me. Sadly, he isn’t me, but if he stopped using ladies scented body wash and switched to Old Spice, he could smell like he’s me. Look down, back up, where are you? You’re on a boat with the man your man could smell like. What’s in your hand, back at me. I have it, it’s an oyster with two tickets to that thing you love. Look again, the tickets are now diamonds. Anything is possible when your man smells like Old Spice and not a lady. I’m on a horse.” [Smell like a man, man. Old Spice]
 

Sesame Street - Smell like a Monster

"Hello, everybody, now look at yourself, now back to me, now back at yourself, now back to me. Sadly, you are not a Monster, but if you listen to Grover you will learn all about the word: “On”. Just as this monster does. Look down, back up. Where am I, ah, “I am on a boat”. What is in your hand? Back at me. I have it, it is a clam with two tickets to that thing you love. (clam bites nose) “On my nose”. Anything is possible when you smell like a Monster and you know the word “On”. “I am on a horse”.  "Moo."  "Cow." Smell like a monster On Sesame Street

Hello, parents, look at your life, now look at mine, now back at yours, now back at mine. Sadly, you aren't me, but if you work in social services, and specialize in child protection, you can act like me. Look down, back up, where are you? You're in court with the person you could be like. What's in your hand, back at me. I have the CFCSA in my hand to justify everything that I do. Look again, the folder is in your hand and you now have all the power. Anything is possible when you work for MCFD. I'm writing an affidavit. [Enjoy authority. Be a Protection SW]

I couldn't help myself.

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.