OF COURSE, CRITICS CALL FOR CHANGES

For years sympathizers with the Bayne family dominated the readership of this blog site. Then I took a break but began again to write about Ayn Van Dyk, autistic 12 year old removed from her family to undergo assessment and investigate her family life. This was occasioned by her afternoon skip over the family fence and a wander down the street. She could not be found for three hours. Other readers, occasional and curious take a peek. Some with vested interest in the Ministry of Children browse as well. Be assured that the parents and advocates of child protection reform who comment here are not a small troublesome faction of uninformed complainers.

Critics exist across Canada and in enlightened countries around the world. Critics are calling for greater accountability for the child protection segment of child welfare. That is what must be understood and processed by responsible parties.

Please hear me say that I believe child protection agencies do serve a vital function to safeguard children. Note that I am saying just as emphatically that child protection departments overstep their mandate.

AN APPEAL TO CHILD PROTECTION SOCIAL WORKERS

I once made a public entreaty to social workers engaged in child protection. Here is what I said.

“When you reflect upon the cases in which you are now or have been involved, and if within that list you readily identify families which would benefit from being together rather than apart and you have the means to affect that reconciliation, do all that you can to insure that this happens. So much rests with you. You control destinies. That seems a frightening responsibility.

Anyone occupying a role which owns the weight and the power of the child protection worker within our society, has to have the right stuff if he or she is confidently and effectively to protect the rights of children, safeguard the rights of families and parents and live with a deep contentment at the end of the day. If you see many cases where harm has been inflicted upon innocents, it is understandable that callousness develops toward the responsible caregivers. How discriminating you must be to preserve your own authentic objectivity. How discerning you must be so that can separate fact and evidence from story and assumption. 

You are a member of the public and the public depends upon you front line people to be so careful with your invested power for our sakes, the children among us, children who may require food, opportunity, protection. And by referring to “our sakes” I also intend our families, parents of children, parents who require understanding, a listening ear, parents who require advice & counsel and encouragement, grandparents whose grandchildren are their joys and for whom they hope. Make all of your action choices wisely and be gentle with us please.”

Then, many readers responded of which these are samples.1.     “There is no point appealing to SW as the presence of some good SW, if they ever exist, cannot stop this structural corruption. Nobody will jeopardize their pay cheque, job security and livelihood to uphold justice. Child protection" industry is a racket controlled by a cartel aiming to get rich by ripping off taxpayers at the expense of destroying families. The only way to stop this is by revoking child removal authority and kill CFCSA.”
2.     “Rhetoric that appears radical may not be effective or persuasive. However, revoking child removal authority by killing CFCSA is the only practical solution to end this fiasco and build a safer future for our children. Doing so will not compromise real child protection as there are other laws giving authority to separate abusive parents and children based on good evidence and legal due process. Removing the absolute power to remove will substantially reduce wrongful removal, abuse of power and corruption.”
3.     “The truth about child protection, and all the corruption, is very difficult to articulate because it is so unbelievable. A person tends to sound like a fanatic or lunatic. But just because someone sounds like this, doesn't mean they aren't telling the truth.”
4.     “I had a long history of involvement with MCFD as I was a single parent with multiples and I had a hard time coping with fatigue. Another single mom told me that if I went to my dr. and said I am depressed I could get free childcare. Big mistake!! Many years later they wanted to get me because they thought my son was mentally ill and needed meds so they re-opened a file and claimed 'historical involvement'. It got really weird for quite a while and finally I got my kids back. SO, they do return them. Just keep calm and friendly. Hopefully you are not expected to do a psychological evaluation, as that can be either very good or very bad depending on the doctor. I see now that MCFD was really jerking my chain, as they had no real evidence. They try to bluff you but most of what they write is thin and does not stand up. The case of physical injury is very hard to fight as in SBS. If a medical doctor claims you have physically injured your child, you are in for a long fight. The other stuff should not even be in court and it is a measure they now take to hold the kids until their paperwork catches up. It still can take awhile. I had to wait 4 months without my kids!!! And then there is more work too with all the 'services' they want to give. It is a tough system and all they encourage you to do is to go with their 'services' to a point, as if you do not they make sure you never get your kids back.”

THIS WAS COURT DAY

THE STORY OF AYN VAN DYK

As told by her father Derek Hoare

Part Ten of Fifteen

THIS WAS COURT DAY

October 18-19, 2011

Oct 18

Arg!!! having a hard time getting myself to remember to sit down and write these on time... I'm bad. I will set an alarm in my phone to remind me; 11:30 pm.

So this was court day, much anticipated though I was working off the assumption that it was pointless... an accurate assumption it turns out. I kept Lyric home today with the faint hope that there could be a move to return. But my understanding was that if I refused to consent to their request to a 90 day temporary custody that a case conference would be ordered to see if the two sides could come together avoiding a distant and lengthy trial.

I arrived and saw no-one there I knew... Amie hadn't arrived yet, my lawyer was nowhere in sight, nor Amie's... nobody. After entering the courthouse two group members arrived and we headed into the courtroom. I saw Amie's lawyer and MCFD's lawyer as well as the SW... Still no sign of my lawyer. The hearing lasted about 10 seconds.... I did get to speak my first "word" ever in court... "Ya", when asked if it was me who was present. Surreal first word and over many months in!

SAMPLE QUESTIONS FOR A PARENTAL CAPACITY TEST

If the Ministry is concerned to know Derek Hoare's capacity to parent three children, why not within a five month period state that? Make that happen. What is so fundamentally wrong with the people engaged in this work that the obvious is not apparent?

If you were participating in a parental capacity assessment, would you know what to expect? Have you already been through one of these?

There are several components to an assessment but certainly the elemental interview will subject you to a series of questions which can either appear conventional and non-threatening or if you are nervous to entrust your future to the psychologist who administers the test, they will be unsettling and worrisome.

The psychologist engaged by Child Protection may not develop the questions unilaterally but often a case worker or a team of child protection case workers suggests the questions for which they want to have answers. The parents are customarily presented with these questions in advance of the meeting with the psychologist. If you have had a PCA done, do these questions reflect your experience?

JOSEF FISHER / Part 408 / For Love and For Justice / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Josef Fisher has sometimes written comments on this blog site. At times I have taken exception to his angry writing. Recently, Josef requested that someone convert thousands of words from his sometimes incoherent English writing into a compelling introductory page for his blog.  I don't know why, but I took it on. He needed help. In gratitude Josef contributed a financial gift to the Bayne Trust Fund.  What you read now is a longer post than usual but it is a poignant fifteen year story of brokenness. MCFD is involved in breaking the man. 

Josef did not foresee that his dream of a free and happy life in Canada would turn out so tragically. Josef Fisher was born in Czechoslovakia in 1954 and in 1987 he fled communism to come to Canada. He is a naturalized Canadian living in Vancouver today. He is a broken man.

As an army officer in a small Czechoslovakian town Josef met a Cuban worker named Milene. Milene became pregnant and in 1985 returned to Cuba for their baby's birth. They named their son Yosef (later called Joe). Sadly Milene died eight days after Joe's birth. Milene's two sisters and mother took care of the boy until he was twelve.

Meanwhile Josef met a fellow Czechoslovakian named Iva in Italy where he was in a refugee camp for two years. He emigrated to Canada first and when she arrived ten months later, they were married. They briefly lived in Toronto where their daughter was born and they then moved to Vancouver in August 1991. In time, a son was born. After some interviews in 1995 Josef and Iva became foster parents receiving children from MCFD. They could not have known how MCFD involvement would change their lives. Some foster children from abusive backgrounds exhibited sexually aberrant behaviour which the Fishers reported and satisfactorily handled.

When his grandmother died in Cuba in 1997, Josef's son Joe requested to live in Canada with the Fishers. Fishers were still fostering children when they received Joe. After five months and on his first Christmas Eve in Canada, the Fishers learned that Joe had touched their six year old daughter indecently on several occasions. Joe was mortified by what he had done. While this sybling indiscretion could have been handled by the Fishers themselves, they trusted MCFD, so the Fishers notified their family doctor and MCFD. MCFD was initially satisfied with precautions taken by Fishers but then made accusations that they did not protect the children and MCFD installed 24 hour homemakers to monitor the family until a police investigation was done. A SW accused the Fishers of potential parental sexual exploitation which the social worker later acknowledged to be untrue. The frightened boy was interrogated by a Vancouver Police Sexual Offenses Squad detective who concluded the boy was remorseful and there was no risk of re-offending and no charge would be laid but also that counseling was needed for the boy's threats to harm himself.

Joe was twelve and terrified by social and psychiatric professionals. All members of the Fisher biological family were ordered into counselling. Josef and Iva felt victimized by a system that did not listen, assumed falsely, repeatedly made accusations and shut them out of consultations with their son. Their family future was being planned without them. Having fled communism, they were experiencing government interference and were helpless. They delivered requests for help to officials in early 1998. Their foster home was closed in 1998. Fishers were not permitted to say goodbye to the last foster child removed on Mother's Day in May 1998. Iva and Josef had to have mental health assessments. They refused. They cancelled the voluntary care agreement. They were threatened that Joe would be charged with sexual assault and their own children removed. Fishers were perceived as being unwilling for their children to receive therapeutic help.

They made appeals to anyone and everyone. Josef repeatedly complained to police and MCFD, the Attorney General, the Representative of Children, to MLA's, to MPs, the Civil Liberties Commission and the Canadian Human Rights Commission alleging Human Rights violations. Initial sympathy always resulted in disappointment. Their children's teachers and their family doctor commended the Fishers and deplored MCFD's treatment. Sympathetic professionals sought to intervene but were squelched by MCFD. Young Joe needed a Spanish translation to understand. Mr. Fisher's own ability to express himself in English was always a challenge and his growing anxiety was expressed in ways that social workers felt offended and threatened. For the first time his mental health was questioned and the audio recording of the police interrogation is on his blog. As his helplessness increased, Mr. Fisher acted irrationally and he was arrested for uttering threats, then released. Josef's complaints were seen as inflammatory, harsh, libelous and slanderous. Judges would not listen to the Fishers' charges. Josef was viewed as a risk, obsessive and mentally unstable. Josef's communications were prolific and relentless until his letters and faxes and emails were viewed as criminal harassment. By 2000 all agencies closed their ears to Josef. He was arrested once again, charged, found guilty and placed on probation. Over the next eight years he was arrested nine times, was incarcerated for many months, was detained for psychiatric assessment and was diagnosed as narcissistic, obsessive, compulsive, paranoid with antisocial traits. The issues were always related to Criminal harassment, Breach of probation and Uttering threats. On March 14 2005 Josef hit the news as an Emergency Response Team was summoned to prevent him from lighting himself on fire at the CBC Plaza in downtown Vancouver. By 2007 his son Joe had already experienced tasering, arrest, become drug dependent and homelessness. He was eventually placed in a group home.

Josef has not stopped telling his story and he will never get over his destroyed life. I don't condone all that Josef did. Had I known him I would have advised him on different courses of action many times. So, while Josef is responsible for his own responses, all government systems failed him and his family. His daughter has gone on to be successful at university. Josef and his son Joe (now 26) may find an apartment together. Josef and his wife Iva will be divorced in January 2011. I truly hope that all their lives are happier in 2011.

I have Josef's permission to tell this story. You can read Josef's own journalled account of his long ordeal in his linked blog. As you read all of his pages, bear in mind that the writing reflects Josef's agony, anger, confusion as well as English being his second language.