|
click for help
collapse
On this page press one of the expand
buttons to see the full text of an article. Later
press collapse to revert to the original
form. The button below expands all articles.
show all
More recent news
More on Car Seats
April 8, 2006
The following article from a volunteer news site shows
the contempt that professional child protectors have
for car seats.
expand
collapse
Connecticut Department of Children
& Families claims it is exempt from the law and
allegedly endangers three toddlers, which resulted in
a complaint made to police.
By AJ Fontaine -- National News Director
03-15-06
ANSONIA, CT - On March 14 Eric Belko filed an
official complaint of misconduct with the Ansonia
Police against, at least five police officers that
allegedly permitted Connectciut Department of Children
& Families (D.C.F.) worker Luis-Rivas Vazquez to
transport three premature toddlers, without car safety
seats.
The children were removed by D.C.F. on
unsubstantiated allegations made 8 weeks prior. Mr.
Belko's 11 year old step child was also removed, but
was returned only a few days after.
Connectciut State law requires very young children
to be restrained while a vehicle is in motion and
State employees are not exempt from obeying such laws.
Our staff contacted the D.C.F. abuse hotline
regarding the matter and later received a call from a
supervisor claiming transporting young children
without proper restraints, is not a violation.
Mr. Belko said, "I filed a complaint against the
police officers with Lt. Cota, and started an
investigation into Luis Rivas-Vazquez today."
Mr. Belko also stated he was retaining Philip N.
Walker, Esq. of Becker And Walker, LLC of
Collinsville, CT to represent him in court.
remainder snipped
Last November we reported on the death of Emma
Ringrose. We received an email complaining about
the story:
expand
collapse
| From: |
Geoff & Pam Ringrose
<gpringrose@rogers.com> |
| To: |
rtmq@stn.net |
| Subject: |
article re; Emma Ringrose |
| Date: |
Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:42:19 -0500 |
Dear Mr. McQuaid,
I am Emma Ringrose's father. I am absolutely
disgusted to see the article printed on your site
suggesting that Emma was improperly restrained in our
mini-van. She was in a proper booster seat, wearing
her seat belt properly, a seat belt, by the way, which
was still attached after Emma was ejected from our
vehicle. The police, the coroner and Transport Canada
who studied the seat and belt themselves, have said
that Emma was absolutely restrained properly in our
van. Your assertion that she was not indicates that
your site is based purely on assumptions and
conjecture, and destroys any credibility you claim to
have. If your are a man of any ethical worth, you'll
not only correct your site, but issue an apology as
well.
Geoff Ringrose
There is no way to know of the authenticity of a
message that arrives unsolicited from cyberspace, and
the author did not respond to a request for copies of
the exculpatory statements alluded to in the email.
We posted an article earlier showing that in real
life it is not
practical for parents to properly install a care
seat. Our conclusion about Emma was based on the
report by Melinda Dalton: "Emma Ringrose was ejected
from her seat at the time of impact, police said". This
in an accident in which no adults were seriously hurt.
Maybe as in the case of Connecticut DCF, the parents did
not strap the child into the seat, maybe the seat was
not properly attached to the vehicle or maybe Emma
slipped out of the belt. Since few parents are callous
enough to endanger their own child, one of the latter
two is more likely, as corroborated by the statement
that the belt was still attached after the accident.
Car seats protect infants in the laboratory. In
practice, they are death-traps.
Coroner to Disclose Child Deaths
April 8, 2006
The following report reveals plans to disclose
reports of child deaths. Our previous research
suggests Ontario has 28 deaths a year in foster
care, yet less than one per year gets reported in
the press. The disclosure of the true death rate could
lead to the kind of public reaction that would provoke
real reform. The coroner's plans could be good news.
but we remain skeptical. The coroner may omit deaths in
foster care, or suppress the names of the children,
making the reports almost useless to the public.
expand
collapse
Toronto Star
Child death details to be public
Change made in response to 5-year-old Toronto
boy's death
Coroner's office given mandate by provincial
government
Apr. 7, 2006. 01:00 AM
DALE ANNE FREED AND NICK PRON
STAFF REPORTERS
The Ontario coroner's office is set to begin
publicly disclosing the details of all suspicious
child deaths in the province, the Toronto Star has
learned.
The move, effective immediately, will blow the lid
off the secrecy that previously surrounded such
deaths. Provincial coroners investigate about 230
child deaths annually; about 20 are deemed
suspicious.
The change was prompted by the death of 5-year-old
Jeffrey Baldwin, who died on Nov. 30, 2002, in what
has been called perhaps the worst case of child
malnutrition seen in Canada.
Jeffrey's maternal grandparents, Elva Bottineau and
Norman Kidman, were charged with first-degree murder
in the boy's death. After a four-month trial without
a jury that ended early this year, Justice David Watt
is expected to deliver his verdict today. An inquest
is also expected to be called.
"There are lots of lessons that can be learned by
children's aid societies about what types of deaths
occur while children are in their care and what can be
done about them," deputy coroner Dr. Jim Cairns said
in an interview.
Prior to the new mandate from the provincial
government, "that information has not been getting to
them, to the children's aid community in Ontario" said
Cairns, chair of the Pediatric Death Review Committee,
which falls under the chief coroner's office. The
Ministry of Children and Youth Services is giving the
committee $100,000 to carry out statistical analyses
on child deaths.
"We'll be able to look at recurring themes of child
deaths. If children's aid societies take
recommendations from this report, they might be able
to change their policies and practices, and prevent
similar deaths from occurring in the future," Cairns
said.
The latest development was welcomed by Jeanette
Lewis, executive director of the Ontario Association
of Children's Aid Societies.
"The system needs to learn from horrible cases such
as Jeffrey's," she said.
Today's verdict at the University Ave. courthouse
comes as MPP Andrea Horwath (NDP-Hamilton East) is
calling on the province to give its ombudsman the
power to investigate complaints involving Ontario's 53
children's aid societies.
The bill passed first reading on Wednesday.
"In Ontario, there is no independent investigative
avenue for people to turn to complain about the
children's aid socities," Ombudsman André Marin said
in an interview.
"Here you have a huge bureaucracy, swallowing $1.5
billion of provincial money and handling the most
vulnerable of children in society, yet outside the
reach of oversight."
Material relating to Jeffrey Baldwin
omitted
Tell Andrea Horwath
April 8, 2006
The amendments to the Child and Family Services Act
were enacted without provision for the Ombusdman to look
into Children's Aid Societies. Now Andrea Horwath has
introduced a bill to do just that. Here are links
to:
A letter from John Dunn explains the situation, and
what you can do.
expand
collapse
Hello folks,
When Bill 210 was going through the Legislative
Assembly (Queens Park in Toronto) it went through all
three stages before it became law. During those
stages, the NDP's Andrea Horwath attempted to get the
Ombudsman to have jurisdiction over CAS's
administrative and other decisions which are not
subject to the court's Jurisdiction. Unfortunately
the Government of the Day, (Liberals) shot the attempt
down (including the Ministry of Children and Youth
Services) They did not want the Ombudsman to have
power to review CAS decisions or lack of decisions
(omissions).
Now, in protest, Andrea Horwath has introduced to
the Legislative Assembly, Bill 88, 2006. It is
called
Bill 88, 2006, Ombudsman Amendment Act
(Children's Aid Societies), 2006.
By Introducing this to the Legislative Assembly,
she is forcing the Government to publicly admit that
they do not want any form of external accountability
over CAS's.
The reason it will force the Government to have to
publicly admit it is because of how a Bill becomes
Law. The Bill gets "introduced" to the Legislative
Assembly and is "read for the first time" of three
times.
The first time is just so all of the members of the
Provincial Government have a chance to be made aware
of it, and read it, then after a short period of time,
(a few days) it is put on the Government's business
schedule to be read a Second Time. This is when after
everyone has had time to read it and prepare a
discussion about it and their feelings, they get to
discuss it publicly on the Legislative Assembly
Channel (ONTLA) and will have their words permanently
saved in the document or transcript called
"Hansard".
Then after second reading it goes to the public
possibly for public hearings. Now folks, this is your
chance to go to the Government to force them to hear
your stories of how CAS did, or did not do what it was
not supposed to do, or what it was supposed to do etc,
how they abused their power and how it affected your
family and children's lives.
If you were in foster care yourself, get your life
story told. Especially any abuse of yourself in care.
Your attempts to get your records without success and
the like.
We have been given a second chance to bring the
attention of CAS abuse and omissions to the
Legislative Assembly of Ontario and to the General
Public. Don't let us miss it again. If you have ever
filed a complaint and had it unresolved, or were
intimidated from complaining through the use of your
child as a barganing chip, or if your child is not
getting mail from you, or anything at all, this is
your chance.
I of course will keep everyone informed.
Addendum:
expand
collapse
April 8, 2006
Andrea Horwath
Room 159 Main Legislative Building
Toronto Ontario M7A 1A5
ahorwath-qp@ndp.on.ca
Subject: Bill 88
Esteemed Madam:
I applaud you on your introduction of bill 88, to
allow the Ontario Ombudsman to look into the operation
of Ontario's children's aid societies.
In hopes that it may help your effort, I enclose an
email that I sent to CH-TV after your appearance on
March 9. In addition to this anecdote, I can also
tell you of their groundless attempt to turn my
three-year-old son into a crown ward, or summarize the
over two hundred interviews I had with aggrieved
families during my efforts to organize the required
number of CAS members. Please let me know if you
think these would help you further.
Robert T McQuaid
Mattawa Ontario
email: rtmq@stn.net
March 9, 2006
Mark Hebscher
Donna Skelly
CH TV
530@chtv.ca
Subject: Dominic Verticchio claim
Sir and Madam:
On your program this afternoon with Andre Marin,
Andrea Horwath and Dominic Verticchio, Mr Verticchio
said that the CAS board of directors is independently
elected, making it a form of oversight over children's
aid.
I ran for the board of directors of Dufferin CAS.
The board is elected by the members, and in year and a
half of recruiting, I had a quarter of the membership.
In another year and a half I could have reached a
majority. How did CAS react? They changed the rules
making it impossible for me, or anyone else not
approved by the incumbents, to run.
Robert T McQuaid
Mattawa Ontario
email: rtmq@stn.net
Baldwin Verdict
April 7, 2006
Today a guilty verdict was delivered in the death of
Jeffrey Baldwin. By the conviction of their contractors
of questionable mental faculties, the Catholic
Children's Aid Society of Toronto escapes culpability.
They have released a statement suggesting that modification of their
procedures is all that is necessary. Their list of
remedies does not include the words "mother" or
"father".
expand
collapse
The Globe and Mail
POSTED AT 9:56 PM EDT ON 07/04/06
Grandparents found guilty in boy's
death
Canadian Press
Grandparents Elva Bottineau, 54 and Norman Kidman,
53, have been found guilty of second-degree murder
in the starvation death of five-year-old Jeffrey
Baldwin. (CTV)
Toronto — A Toronto couple who allowed their
five-year-old grandson to starve to death have been
found guilty of second-degree murder.
Fifty-four-year-old Elva Bottineau and 53-year-old
Norman Kidman were supposed to have saved their
grandchildren from a life of abuse after they were
taken from their birth parents.
Instead, five-year-old Jeffrey Baldwin was confined
to a locked, unheated bedroom for as much as 14 hours
a day, breathing in the smell of his own urine and
feces.
The details of his tragic life were outlined for
the court Friday in a lengthy address by Justice David
Watt that took much of the day.
Court heard he was treated like a dog, made to eat
out of a bowl with his fingers and he often drank from
a toilet when he was thirsty.
Immediately upon the verdict's release, Ontario's
chief coroner announced that an inquest would be
held.
"The circumstances surrounding Jeffrey's death have
been a matter of public interest," Dr. Barry
McLellan's office said in a release.
"Issues to be addressed at the inquest include the
Toronto Catholic Children's Aid Society's involvement
in Jeffrey's placement and the role that agency, and
others, had in monitoring his well-being prior to his
death."
Emergency crews were shocked when they found
Jeffrey's frail body, weighing less than he did on his
first birthday.
He was just 21 pounds when he died of starvation
and pneumonia in November 2002, weeks before his sixth
birthday.
When his sister was rescued from the house she too
showed obvious signs of starvation with skinny limbs,
a distended belly and open sores.
Although the children lived in squalor, the rest of
the house was immaculately clean, court heard.
The couple was also found guilty of forcible
confinement for the girl's care.
Ms. Bottineau's lawyer Anil Kapoor had argued his
client did not deliberately kill her grandson. He
cited a psychologist who testified Ms. Bottineau was
mentally retarded with a personality disorder that
prevented her from seeing Jeffrey waste away.
But another expert witness, Lisa Ramshaw,
contradicted that assessment and said Ms. Bottineau
had "a higher order of thinking than someone with
mental retardation" and lied to protect herself.
Lawyer Catherine Glaister told Judge Watt that Mr.
Kidman did not plan to kill Jeffrey and had little
involvement in the children's lives.
Judge Hughes Reports
April 7, 2006
Scandal over the death of Sherry Charlie in foster
care prompted the government of British Columbia to
impanel a review led by retired judge Ted Hughes. Today
his report BC Children
and Youth Review was published. In obtuse
bureaucratic language he made 62 recommendations, all
for changes within the bureaucracy. There is provision
for changing the bureaucratic reaction to a child death,
but the changes do not include disclosure of the case
file of the dead child. The terms "mother" and "father"
do not appear in the recommendations. Scandal is not
enough to cause real reform of the child protection
juggernaut.
Police Harass Dissent
April 6, 2006
Last Sunday, April 2, near Ottawa Frank Mailly killed
his wife, three children and himself. The social
services system responds to these cases by vilifying
fathers, and demanding more control over their conduct.
Fathers groups on the internet have been discussing an
alternative view, that the social services system pushed
the father beyond his endurance, leading to the
murder/suicide. For example, less than a month before
the deaths, the parents tried to reconcile, but the
courts refused them permission to vary a restraining
order.
Police are now cracking down on advocates of the
alternative view. Here is a letter from a separated
father giving his experience.
expand
collapse
Thursday 6th April 2006
This writer Jeremy Swanson - Fathers and Men's
Rights Activist of Ottawa was "visited" by the Ottawa
police today at 3.00 pm today. The "visit" was linked
to the Frank Mailly murder-suicide. I was not charged
with anything nor am not implicated in, linked to or
regarded as being any part of the crime. But I was
questioned for over 30 minutes.
I am not aware that this visit may be part of any
larger 'crack-down' on Fathers Rights Activists.
However I do understand that other Ottawa activists
have also received "visits" by the Ottawa Police
today. I am not sure of the extent of the "raids" at
this time as I am still somewhat in a state of some
confusion and surprise. I did not give, offer or
issue any information other than in reply to the
questions I was asked and which affected me directly.
I told them that Fathers, Men and Ottawa activists
like all of the rest of you are only fighting for our
constitutional and charter rights. And I told them
why.
I was asleep at the time of the visit and at a
complete disadvantage. They banged on the door to
wake me, ordered my room opened by the mangement and
then entered my room without any invitation. I was
questioned at length. I was allowed to change and
join them in the TV room next door without
aggravation. I was treated relatively politely and I
was not threatened, treated roughly or discourteously.
I was not assaulted in any way. And obviously I was
not arrested.
Activism sometimes gets attention as you can see.
This is the time to fight on harder. We need to
continue the struggle and intensify it-non-violently
and legally but fighting for your rights-and the
truth-nevertheless. Remember although the Family
Courts do not respect our Charter Rights we are still
guaranteed some rights under the Charter and that is
the freedom of protest and assembly and
association-among many others. There are no
indications that these might be denied us. Yet.
I will put out a press release shortly.
Addendum: The formal
press release (doc format).
CAS Manhunt
April 5, 2006
The following ad appeared in the Ottawa Citizen. The
phone number in the ad is that of the Children's Aid
Society of Ottawa.
expand
collapse
Thursday, April 6, 2006
People Finders (04/04/06)
ANYONE KNOWING the whereabouts of Clinton Anderson
please contact E. Haimovitz 747-7800 ext. 3471. The
Ottawa Citizen, Area Code 613
Louise Malenfant RIP
April 4, 2006
Louise Malenfant, a long-time advocate for reform of
family law, including child protection, has passed away.
Here is an announcement from Walter Schneider
expand
collapse
| From: |
"Walter H. Schneider"
<walter.schneider@fathersforlife.org>
|
| To: |
"Walter H. Schneider"
<info@fathersforlife.org> |
| Sent: |
Tuesday, April 04, 2006 10:18 AM |
| Subject: |
Louise Malenfant passed away |
2006 04 03
Louise Malenfant is no more
During the past weekend Louise Malenfant passed
away at her home, in Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
Louise Malenfant had devoted her life to mothers
and fathers who lost their children due to injustices
such as false abuse allegations. She had been
influential in her native Manitoba to get the
bureaucracy to accept that false abuse allegations
must not be used by anyone, be they individuals or
members of the bureaucracy, to gain the upper hand in
removing children from parents.
A few years ago Louise Malenfant moved to Alberta,
with the aim to help bring about changes in the
attitude of the bureaucracy here, such as those she
had helped to create in Manitoba. She has helped
countless parents, mostly fathers, to regain
reputations and contact with children of whom they had
been robbed, and she prevented many innocent men from
being punished for crimes they did not do.
Louise Malenfant will be missed by many.
Details about the funeral arrangement are not known
as of now but will be published here when that
information become available.
Louise Malenfant's web pages: Parents Helping
Parents fathersforlife.org/php/toc.htm
Series on Foster Care
April 4, 2006
The Toronto Sun and Ottawa Sun have run a three part
series on Foster Care. Part one says that the Ontario
Coroner deals with 70 CAS deaths a year and that Toronto
CAS (presumably excluding CCAS) reported twelve client
deaths in 2004. Here is the series Suffer the Children with later
articles at the end.
TV Program on Georgia DFCS
April 4, 2006
The family of Jackson Bortz has
saved a streaming video of a television program on Georgia DFCS (wmv format).
It should play in Winamp or Windows Media Player.
Addendum: The tv program was broadcast on WSB
Atlanta on April 3. The next day a judge ordered
Jackson Bortz, the child at the centre of the first part
of the program, returned to his parents, subject only to
visits by child protectors for the next 90 days.
Chartier on Trial
April 1, 2006
Marie-Emilie Chartier successfully escaped from
Canada with her children in March 2005, but made the
mistake of fleeing to the country with the world's most
oppressive social services system, Sweden. She and her
children were forcibly returned to Canada and she is now
on trial for the "crime" of caring for her own children.
One of our earlier posts on the incident includes a commentary
by John Dunn. The article below describes developments
in her legal case.
expand
collapse
Jury dismissed after objections to its
racial mix
Paula McCooey
The Ottawa Citizen
Saturday, April 01, 2006
A Superior Court judge yesterday dismissed a jury
after a woman accused of abducting her children
complained that the jurors don't reflect the racial
mix of Canadian society.
"I do not wish to go ahead with the trial at this
point in time," said Marie-Emilie Chartier, 36.
She told Justice Charles Hackland she was
dismissing her lawyer because he and the Crown
prosecutor "have forgotten the jury (members) are not
representative of the Canadian community.
"I, being a black woman, am not represented."
Ms. Chartier, who does not have legal custody of
her four children, has pleaded not guilty to four
charges of child abduction after taking the children
to Sweden last year, despite not having legal custody
of them.
Judge Hackland acknowledged Ms. Chartier's
concerns and dismissed the jury, saying their services
were no longer needed after having heard a week's
worth of testimony.
"Members of the jury, there have been some
developments that have come in the last day. The
accused has decided to discharge her lawyer. The
trial cannot continue before you. Regrettably, this
is concluded. You are discharged. Thank you."
"I don't think the accused can handle her own
defence and she has said she does not want to," Judge
Hackland said after Ms. Chartier informed the court
she no longer wanted Bruce Engel as her lawyer.
At one point, when Ms. Chartier expressed her
frustration with the court proceedings and said she
was going to walk out of the courtroom, the judge said
he would "have her arrested."
The judge also agreed to adjourn the case until
Monday, by which time Ms. Chartier's new lawyer will
have had a chance to read the transcripts from this
week's proceedings.
Ms. Chartier is accused of breaching provisions of
a custody order and four counts of falsifying passport
documents. She sparked several Canada-wide warrants
and international police alerts in March 2005 when she
took the children to Sweden. She surrendered to
Swedish authorities in early May. She and her
children returned the following week.
Back in Canada, she was released on bail and
required, among other restrictions, not to contact her
children, who are under the legal guardianship of
their grandmother, who lives in Ottawa. Ms. Chartier
only has restricted access to the children.
On Monday, Judge Hackland will learn whether the
new lawyer wants to proceed immediately with a
judge-only trial or requires a two- or three-week
adjournment.
The judge could also declare a mistrial, which
would require a new trial and, possibly, having to
select another jury.
Mr. Engel, Ms. Chartier's current lawyer, said it
will be confirmed on Monday whether he is officially
dismissed, or if she has retained a new lawyer.
"It is too bad because I would like to continue to
represent her," he said after the adjournment. "I
find this case very interesting."
While Ms. Chartier described her relationship with
Mr. Engel as a "conflict of interest," Mr. Engel
told Judge Hackland he sees it more as a "breakdown of
client-solicitor relationship."
Crown prosecutor Mark Holmes described Ms.
Chartier's request for a new trial as a "ploy" and
that the same issue will possibly arise if there is a
mistrial and another jury is chosen.
"One gets the sense this will not go away with
another jury, when the jury is not representative of
what she would like," said Mr. Holmes.
Dufferin Educator Prosecuted
March 31, 2006
Here is a follow-up on a crime we reported on two years
ago. In this installment, one of the fraudsters
attempts to cover her crime with false documents.
expand
collapse
The Brampton Guardian
Former principal urged to help cover
up fraud
ROGER BELGRAVE
03/31/06 00:00:00
A former principal testified his boss tried to
pressure him into helping cover up accounting fraud at
the Catholic school board.
John Price was testifying for the Crown in the
fraud case of former Dufferin-Peel Catholic District
School Board programs superintendent Beverly Williams.
She was fired in May 2002 after a forensic audit
revealed questionable billing practices within her
department. In February 2004, Peel Regional Police
charged her with fraud following a 12-month
investigation.
During testimony in a Brampton Superior courtroom
Thursday, Price said Williams came to him after the
audit was launched and on several occasions pleaded
for his help.
According to Price, Williams wanted assistance
creating documents that would support bills for work
the crown alleges she never performed.
"I'm going to jail. I'll lose my house. Everyone
around me will be destroyed," Price said Williams
pleaded when she asked for his help.
Prior to his retirement, Price worked in the
board's programs department as a principal in charge
of secondary school reform. He was responsible for
overseeing implementation of the provincial
government's new high school curriculum.
He was also given the day-to-day management duties
of career development projects provided by the school
board and funded by the federal government ministry
formerly known as Human Resources Development Canada
(HRDC).
His duties required him to report to Williams, who
headed the programs department.
Price explained HRDC grants covered project
operating expenses, but there was always a "residual"
amount for the school board.
With approval from board finance officials, he set
up a separate entity called Project Place to handle
HRDC projects. A separate bank account was also
opened so federal government officials could easily
track the funding and expenditures.
Created cost centre
Price said he created a cost centre in the
accounting books called Research Development and
Training (RDT) where the residuals would be kept.
That cost centre was used to pay for trips two trips
to Scotland as well as pay himself and other Project
Place staff for what they considered work above and
beyond regular duties, he said.
The court heard it was commonplace for employees to
establish consulting firms and bill the school board
for extra work through those companies.
Under direction from Williams, Price said he
submitted invoices through his wife's company and
later through his own firm called Vision Builders.
Williams submitted invoices to Project Place for
work done by the Teachers Centre, the court heard.
Until the audit was launched, Price said he assumed
the Teachers' Centre was the program department's
professional development arm. He said he was
surprised to discover the Centre and Williams were one
in the same.
Williams dropped the bomb, according to Price,
during one of several attempts to get his help
creating documents that would show auditors she had
performed work justifying the invoices. "I asked if
(The Teachers' Centre) is even a company and she said
no. She said it's just a bank account," Price
said.
Between 1998 and 2002, Price estimated Project
Place received about $6 million dollars in grants from
HRDC and the provincial education ministry.
Williams was one of three former school board
employees and a current teacher charged with fraud and
bribery involving almost $800,000 in federal grants
and school board funds.
The others facing charges have either pleaded
guilty or court proceedings are ongoing in their
cases.
Price, who retired shortly after Williams was
fired, pleaded guilty to fraud and bribery charges in
2004. The 61-year-old did not spend anytime in jail.
He received a two-year conditional term, 240 hours
community service and had to repay $127,000.
Families Can Refuse Day-Care
March 31, 2006
Policy changes by the Conservative government have
averted a universal day-care program for pre-schoolers.
In Dufferin, children from reluctant families might have
been sent to day-care by force of arms, except
ironically, children in foster care, who are never
placed in day-care.
expand
collapse
The Orangeville Banner
No start for Best Start in Dufferin
KAREN MARTIN-ROBBINS
03/31/06 00:00:00
Karen Martin-Robbins / For The Banner
John Daniel, 3, and Colm Barnett, 3, make a
tower at the Ontario Early Years Centre in
Orangeville. If the Best Start program goes ahead
as planned, the centre will be moved to Island
Lake Public school.
Starting up the Best Start program in Dufferin has
been put on hold until the provincial government can
guarantee they will pay for it.
"We are not prepared to take a leap of faith on
this," says Dan Best, director of community services
for the county.
"We want to make sure we don't set this community
up for failure."
Funding for Best Start was called into question
when the new federal government announced in February
that it plans to back out of the deal.
"We want to make sure, in writing, that the
province will cover the program for 2006, 2007," says
Best.
Before the federal election, the Liberal government
approved $1.9 billion in funding in a five-year deal
with Ontario to boost child care services in the
province.
The provincial government, in turn, created Best
Start, a program that attempts to improve access for
parents and young children to early learning and care.
The province began channelling the money to
municipalities for locally created early child
learning initiatives.
Last year, the county received $1.6 million in an
unconditional grant.
Over five years, the Best Start program would have
created 130 new child care spaces and brought over $6
million in funding to Dufferin County.
As part of the plan, Best says they were going to
move the Ontario Early Years Centre, currently located
on Broadway, to Island Lake public school, which would
be the hub of the local Best Start program.
This hub would have had similar services to Early
Years, with programming for parents and children, but
there would have also been child care on site.
As well, there would have been satellite centres
set up at Montgomery Village public school, Princess
Margaret public school and, potentially, in Grand
Valley.
As well, the Early Years Centre, which is currently
moving into the Mel Lloyd Centre in Shelburne, would
have become a Best Start hub in that community.
"We did extensive consultations with community
stake holders to come up with this plan," Best says.
"It's a community-based, grassroots approach."
However, the federal government announced in
February that it will phase out the funding agreements
with the provinces in favour of a $100 per month
allowance for every child under six years old.
Dufferin-Caledon MP David Tilson supports the
Conservative's plan.
"We want to give choices to parents," he says.
"There are different ways of raising children. If we
compensate those who work, we should compensate those
who don't."
He says the government's plan would benefit not
just stay-at-home parents, but shift workers and
parents in rural areas who may not need traditional
day care or have access to it.
"I think people in Dufferin and Caledon will like
it," he says.
Tilson adds that the monthly allowance will be in
addition to current child subsidies such as the Canada
Child Tax Benefit, that are directed towards low
income families.
The Best Start program will receive federal dollars
until March 2007.
Best says considering this, the county wants to
make sure if they start the program, they can ensure
its viability.
"You can't miss something if you haven't had it,"
he said.
County council is asking the provincial government
for assurances. They want an unconditional grant to
ensure the flow of money for the 2006-2007 year of the
program.
If the provincial money can be guaranteed, the
county can go ahead with its plans but on a smaller
scale than originally planned.
James Ip, spokesperson for Mary Anne Chambers, the
provincial Minister of Children and Youth Services,
says they hope the federal government will change its
mind.
"We are still calling on the federal government to
honour the initial agreement," he says.
Tilson says that's not going to happen. "I don't
think there's a hope in heck," he says. "We're
committed to this."
The Conservatives' plan will be subject to the
budgetary process, but if it is approved it will be
implemented in July 2006.
According to the 2006 provincial budget, released
last week, if the federal government does back out,
the provincial government will only make up $127
million of the $1.4 billion originally expected for
the program.
Ip says the province will work with their
"municipal partners" to get the programs going across
the province and hope for the best.
Charity Begins at Home
March 31, 2006
What does a women's shelter do with a donation? The
staff splits it!
expand
collapse
CBC.CA
Women's shelter spends charity dollars
on bonuses for staff, board members
Last Updated: Mar 31 2006 08:49 AM CST
A Regina safe house that helps abused women dipped
into its donation fund to pay a Christmas bonus to its
staff and board of directors, CBC News has learned.
Each year, Regina residents donate thousands of
dollars to the Leader-Post newspaper's "Christmas
Cheer Fund."
The money goes to local charities, including
women's shelters and safe houses.
One of the charities that has received money is the
Wichihik Iskewak Safe House (WISH) in Regina. It has
received annual donations since 1997 and last year it
accepted $29,552.
The CBC has learned $13,000 — or close to
half of its allotment last year — went to a
Christmas bonus.
Full time staff and board members received $500 and
part-time staff received $100.
Donations been used in the past for furniture,
upgrades, supplies and similar expenses.
However, last December the WISH board voted to
change its rules so the money could be used for
bonuses. The rationale was that people are donating
to improve the shelter and a Christmas bonus is an
investment in people, a WISH spokesperson told
CBC.
Laura Fauchon, WISH executive director, defended
spending the money on the staff and board members.
However, individual donors to the Christmas Cheer Fund
have told CBC they are disappointed and disillusioned
at the way the money was spent.
"It's like stealing from Santa Claus, it just isn't
right," said Blaine Haubrich, who lives in Glenbain
and donated $100 to the charity.
"They should have been more up front if they were
going to do this, right from day one, and then the
Leader-Post could have determined if they were a fit
candidate to receive this money."
Leader-Post editor-in-chief Janice Dockham said it
was "extraordinarily bad judgment" that the donations
would be spent on bonuses.
CAS Lacks Oversight
March 29, 2006
Most of today's news stories on bill 210 are based on
the Ontario government's self-congratulatory
press release. Ontario Ombudsman André
Marin has a different view.
expand
collapse
CAS review board not good enough:
ombudsman
Last updated Mar 29 2006 09:02 AM EST
CBC News
The creation of a neutral third party to hear
complaints against Ontario's 53 Children's Aid
Societies does not go far enough, says the province's
ombudsman.
An amendment to the Child and Family Services Act,
which passed this week, will see the formation of an
independent Child and Family Services Review Board.
But Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin, who has
jurisdiction over the board, says there is no change
to how an actual investigation is carried out.
"We have a remote, third-hand ability to oversee a
tribunal or agency of the government, which does not
give us the ability to do a frontline investigation,"
said Marin.
Marin says the province missed an opportunity in
not dealing with that part of the act.
But Children and Youth Services Minister Mary Anne
Chambers said the creation of the new review board is
more than adequate.
"It does not stop with the board of directors at a
Children's Aid Society now, it goes well beyond that,"
Chambers said.
Bill 210 Enacted
March 28, 2006
Bill 210 amending the Child and Family Services Act
was enacted yesterday by the Ontario Legislature. Here
are links to the Hansard and a press release by Mary Anne Chambers. The new
legislation will gut the internal complaints procedure
within Children's Aid, will establish a new altenative
dispute resolution procedure that may weaken aggrieved
parents access to the courts, and will allow adoption of
children who still have legal ties to their natural
parents. The Ontario Ombudsman was not given authority
to look into CAS abuses. You will not find out how your
MPP voted, because the bill was enacted without a
recorded vote.
Demonstration in Atlanta
March 28, 2006
Georgia parents staged a demonstration yesterday
against their local child protection agency, DFCS. Here
are links to two television news reports, in wmv format:
cbs wsb.
Suggestions for Andrea Horwath
March 27, 2006
Here is thoughtful letter to Andrea Horwath in the
continuing effort to amend bill 210.
expand
collapse
| Date: |
Mon, 27 Mar 2006 08:24:05 -0500 |
| From: |
"arc angel" |
| To: |
ahorwath-co@ndp.on.ca |
| Subject: |
On Bill 210 |
Dear Ms Horwath,
The following letter about Bill 210 is from a post
I made to the afterfostercare group last December.
Unfortunately, my concerns are still valid. In my
view, the McGuinty government is withholding
improvements to services as a means to blackmail
citizens into accepting an entrenched lack of
accountability.
Right now, the courts are parents' only means of
external accountability. Aside from the expense in
time and money that this invokes, it's like using a
screwdriver to hammer in a nail. Judges are not
versed in the code of conduct established by the
Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service
Workers; they are versed in the Child and Family
Services Act, which protects child protection workers
under the heavy and obsuring blanket of "good faith."
The OCSWSSW can lift that blanket, but there is no
mandate in the CSFA for them to do so.
Does the CAS try to intimidate parents? Ask
yourself why the Ottawa CAS employs a professional
football player — Jason Mallett — as a
front-line child protection worker during his
off-seasons. Aside from the expense of this on-again,
off-again employment, I have to ask why the CAS feels
that this is appropriate. Remember, there is no
statutory minimum of training or professional
accreditation required for employment by a CAS.
You may use this letter as you see fit as long as
my name is withheld. I believe that the Ottawa CAS is
aware of my pseudonym but cannot confirm it. In the
past, they have gone to some lengths to silence me. I
left Ontario to get away from their harassment, but
most of my family is in Ottawa and I don't want them
harassed as the CAS attempts to "set me straight."
Regards,
/name withheld/
Dec 06, 2005
My concern is whether or not a revised procedure
would be implemented effectively. That is, would it
be worded in such a way that it could be circumvented?
We've already seen that there are no standards within
or between CASs because there is nothing forcing them
to be there. CASs, directors, the Minister ... up
until now, all of them have been able to kill the
process whenever they've felt like it, for arbitrary
reasons.
CAS workers complain of being overworked and
underfunded, yet their judgement under these stressful
conditions is always assumed to be perfect.
Bad case workers and supervisors have become
accustomed to being able to halt the process at their
convenience. These people will be looking for ways to
keep doing the same thing if the rules are changed, so
safeguards must be built in to prevent them from from
doing that.
Right now, the CFSA and the CASs themselves are
structured to protect the workers.
Keep in mind that at least two Offices exist, in
whole or in part, in this government *BECAUSE* too
often the CASs and their workers fail to do their jobs
properly: The Office of the Child Advocate and the
Office of the Children's Lawyer. Even these Offices
fail due to overwork, underfunding, and, in the case
of the Children's Lawyer, a question of bias.
Those safeguards are for the protection of
children. Not a single effective safeguard exists to
protect parents or family integrity from the CASs, its
workers, or the system. In effect, there is no "Child
and Family Services Act," it is the "Child Protection
Services Act."
Here are a few of my recommendations, as they
pertain to an adult's ability to resolve problems in
dealing with a CAS or problem worker(s):
- Complaints procedures must be available publicly,
with no restriction on their distribution. Right
now, the Ottawa CAS distributes its rules *only*
in printed form. They attempt to restrict
distribution by claiming that nobody can copy the
material but them (not just the layout but the
content). What does this public-service
organization have to fear from the public knowing
about the rules under which the public can
communicate with them? Refusing to waive the
copyright on the printed document is a petty
attempt to restrict access, and it violates the
spirit of our copyright laws. I'd also argue that
as a procedural document intended for the public,
its content should be exempted from copyright
protection (although the structure and layout
should be protected). It's like trying to
copyright a city's bylaws to prevent people from
knowing where can park.
- Complaints procedures must adhere to consistent
guidelines set by the Ministry. These guidelines
must ensure consistent treatment of the public
throughout the province, with special
accommodations given to individual CASs only in
unavoidable circumstances. It is critical that
these guidelines specify limits on response times
and define a clear hierachy from level to level, a
means of external adjudication to determine a fair
outcome, and a means by which a complainant can
get around roadblocks in the process (like a
difficult worker or supervisor).
The Ottawa CAS has a ridiculous response time
of 30 business days (that's six weeks!) for EACH
stage in the process, and that's with the case
materials readily available to them. Parents are
not given that kind of latitude in any kind of
dealings with the Ottawa CAS, especially not legal
dealings. Supervisors at the Ottawa CAS "dismiss"
complaints after hearing from the workers, without
asking for discussion with or clarification from
the complainants. Executives at the Ottawa CAS
"reassign" complaints right back down to the
workers who failed to deal with problems properly
in the first place. The Ottawa CAS reserves the
right to restrict the choice of support person a
complainant can bring in to a meeting. As the
rules are defined in the printed material, a
complainant would not be able to bring in an
interpreter, lawyer or service assistant since the
CAS will not allow a third party brought in by the
complainant to speak to anyone except the
complainant. The Ottawa CAS dictates the rules to
follow during meetings, including whether or not
to allow recording by the complainant, while
reserving its own right to record via the audio
system and have its own witnesses behind one-way
glass.
- Members of the public must be allowed the ability
to make complaints, even if they are not "clients"
of the CAS. CAS workers appear in public and deal
with the public during the course of their duties,
and the public should be free to report
misconduct, particularly since the public is
obligated to report suspected abuse to the CAS.
For example, right now, if a member of the public
witnesses an Ottawa CAS worker abusing a child,
that person is obligated to report the incident.
However, the Ottawa CAS is free to dismiss the
report of abuse by defining it as a complaint
against the conduct of a worker, thereby putting
it under the aegis of the complaints procedure,
which is barred to non-clients. This is not as
unlikely as it seems, particularly with advocates
and other third parties becoming increasingly
involved during parent-worker interactions.
- Guidelines must be clear and unambiguous,
otherwise they will lead to legal battles that are
likely to end in either inconsisent rulings or in
the heavily-biased and utterly undefined "good
faith" excuse.
- Tangible and workable remedies must be defined to
deal with CASs and workers that violate the
guidelines set out by the Ministry--in all areas,
not just the complaints procedures. One of the
problems that parents face right now is that the
courts are their only recourse for dealing with
entrenched problems with the CASs, and the courts
are powerless to do anything because there is
nothing specified in the law to allow judges to
deal with problem workers and CASs. Unless a
judge chooses to be a maverick, he'll stand by the
letter of the law, which favours, or at least
absolves, the CASs and their workers (this is
readily apparent from court outcomes in which in a
CAS is determined to be clearly in the wrong, yet
no significant consequences are levelled) . In
terms available legal remedies, everything is at
the Minister's discretion, with no clearly defined
process or consequences set out to give parents
any guidance or hope.
Remember, there is no right without a remedy.
If there is no legally defined solution to address
a statutory violation, then the issue is *not* a
right under the law, regardless of how firmly it's
worded. In other words, if a CAS violates the
CFSA and the courts are not told what to do, or
what they they can do, to fix the problem, then
all they can do is wag their fingers and say "Stop
that," leaving the CAS free to do it again (and
again, and again, and ...)
A Different Kind of Tragedy
March 26, 2006
Fear of over-zealous child protection resulted in the
death of a girl in England.
expand
collapse
The Scotsman Wed 22 Mar 2006
Man did not rescue child for fear
of 'pervert' slur
ALEX CORNELIUS
A BRICKLAYER who passed a toddler walking alone in a
village shortly before her fatal fall into a pond said
yesterday he did not stop to help in case people thought
he was trying to abduct her.
Clive Peachey, from Cornwall, told an inquest jury in
Stratford-upon-Avon that he had passed two-year-old girl,
Abby Rae, in his van shortly after 10am on 28 November,
2002.
This was just moments after the toddler disappeared
from the Ready Teddy Go nursery in the Warwickshire
village of Lower Brailes, according to staff.
Abby was found an hour later in an algae-covered
garden pond and rescued by her mother, Victoria Rae.
She was taken to Birmingham Children's Hospital by air
ambulance but was pronounced dead.
Mr Peachey, of Liskeard, told the inquest he had
passed the little girl as she tottered towards the
road in High Street.
He said: "I kept thinking I should go back. The
reason I didn't go back was because I thought people
might think I was trying to abduct her.
"I was convinced her parents were driving around and
had found her."
Mrs Rae, 36, wept as Mr Peachey gave his evidence to
the packed hearing.
She had earlier read emotionally from a statement as
she relived the moment she dragged her daughter from
the pond.
Two nursery employees had gone into the garden during
their search but told the inquest they did not see the
pond because it was covered in green vegetation.
The inquest was adjourned until today.
Addendum: Here is a commentary by Wendy McElroy.
More from Jack Stratton
March 25, 2006
We have been following the case of Jack Stratton. He had
his ten interracial children taken by North Carolina child
protectors. He ran for the Mecklenburg Board of County
Commissioners in 2004, but his campaign was crippled when
the stress of a hearing induced a heart attack in the
courtroom. Here is his latest announcement:
expand
collapse
Please distribute widely on all
websites, forums and email lists to reach as many NC DSS
victims as possible
HELP FOR VICTIMS OF NORTH CAROLINA
DSS
Jack Stratton
jackstratton12@hotmail.com
3-24-06
Have you and your family been attacked and victimized
by the North Carolina DSS? Know someone who has? Help
may be available. You may be able to get your children
released and file a successful federal lawsuit against the
DSS.
This is not a solicitation for money. I have no
ulterior motives except to end child trafficking. I have
done all the hard work for you at tremendous cost to my
family. I am offering my hard earned knowledge and
expertise, which is literally priceless, free of
charge.
YOU WILL NOT OBTAIN THIS INFORMATION
ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE PLANET
Apparently even North Carolina attorneys are completely
ignorant of this information, except for the criminal DSS
attorneys who use it to kidnap children. The
chances of you getting your children back in NC without
this information are almost non-existent. Therefore,
if you are fighting the NC DSS through an attorney, you
are virtually assured of losing your children
forever.
I HAVE UNCOVERED THE WINNING HAND
If you have a North Carolina DSS case, please contact
me via email at jackstratton12@hotmail.com.
If you are a social worker reading this and are
considering trying to find out what I'm up to, be advised
that your extremely low IQ precludes any possibility of
your gathering information from me that I don't want you
to have. Therefore, your best course of action is to
slither back under your rock and stay there.
Jack Stratton
Mail for Andrea Horwath
March 24, 2006
In this letter for Andrea Horwath, the author wants
all details published, including her family picture.
There have been other cases in which parents were
required to make "Sophie's Choice": Which of your
children do you want to keep?
expand
collapse
The Ryder-Flournoy children, from the left Chance
5, Austyn 8, Pierce 7 holding Chaselyn 2 and
Tanner 4.
CAS in this province needs to have a watchdog on
them. They need someone they have to be accountable
to for everything they do. I am now involved with
CanadaCourtWatch.com to expose the Rainy River Distict
of NW Ontario CAS offices especially the one in
Atikokan.
I have only the two children back, the other three
are now crownwardships with access ... access that
never happens because I live so far away and they
don't want phone access because my children's
behaviour gets so bad after talking to us ... gee
wonder why? Could it be bc they want to come home and
are being abused there?
I was made to sign papers saying I did all these
terrible things to my children which I DID NOT and my
rights have been violated just to get two back because
the judge was retiring and couldn't continue with the
trial. I was forced to do this. They were taken on
an unverified allegation that wasn't even against me
two years ago. How they could be taken and made crown
wards on a unverified allegation that wasn't against
me in the first place I have no idea. They told the
judge in the beginning it was verified though and
through the little of court trial we had we found out
and its on court record that it was never verifed at
all. They lied to the court and judge to be able to
steal my children. They lied and tricked me and the
courts to illegally steal my children.
Their excuse has come down to this .. I can't
possibly look after five children, I made a poor
decsion marrying an abusive man in the past and
divorcing him (meaning I can't manage five children as
a single parent) that the three children in care
supposedly have disabilities and I can't supply their
needs, disbilities they didn't have when they lived
with me. They have two of them drugged up on very
very dangerous drugs (Seroquel and Clobazam) in my
opinion just to control their behaviour because they
want to come home and I have the doctor's records to
prove it and there has never been a diagnosis made to
warrant drugs.
My one son is so doped up on drugs that he was hit
by a car last summer while in these people's care and
assulted by a fosterparent and it's on record in court
and we also believe sexually abused. The third they
said they are sure they will find something wrong with
him at some point. They separated them all and from
the two I have and me for the last two years, they
have destroyed our lives. I'm contacting media of all
kinds and mp's, mla's and the ombudsman to get people
to listen to whats going on at that office.
Relatives in BC have been trying to get custody of
the kids but were told by cas they aren't gonna let
any family have them, that they are gonna stay in
their care .. ummm aren't family supposed to be
allowed and isn't it law that children be placed with
responsible family should they come forward? The law
society in Ontario won't even return any
correspondence by lawyers in BC hired by family to get
the kids. I'm moving back to BC in the summer, the
children will have no family or ties to this province
whatsoever if those people keep them and they refuse
to move them anywhere out of the district .. mmmm ..
must mean they really really need the extra money they
are getting for them.
This agency in Atikokan Ontario has done this to
several and I mean several other women in the same
town. The Native Friendship Society has told me such
and that none of the women they had taken the kids
from EVER got any back.
I wonder how they can sleep at night, I cry myself
to sleep most nights .. oh ya right .. everyone
knows the more kids in care and the more who
"supposedly" have problems the more money they get for
them. If you don't have money to fight them you are
an easy target when it comes to your children. It all
comes down to money .. not what's right or what's
best for the kids and family.
April Flournoy
Box 809
Manitouwadge Ontario P0T 2C0
More CAS Cases
March 23, 2006
Here are two more letters to politicians and a third
story communicated privately.
This letter to Liberal MP Lloyd St Amand of Brant
will be forwarded to CAS by the politician, so there is
nothing to be gained by concealing names or places.
expand
collapse
| From: |
nathalie gauthier
<nathalie19682000@yahoo.ca> |
| Date: |
2006/03/19 Sun AM 01:46:43 EST |
| To: |
St.Amand.L@parl.gc.ca |
| Subject: |
a plea for help |
Mr. St.-Amand
As the MP and a former lawyer of mine, I am asking
for your help. I don't know who to turn to
anymore.
If you recall, the C.A.S. has been in and out of
my life and a few months ago I had contacted you
regarding a matter that's before the court. This is
not about this case that I am requesting your help.
It's about myself and my unborn child which is due for
July 11th, 2006. I have been informed by a worker
from the Society that an alert has been placed across
Canada due to the fact that I had left Ontario and
moved to New Brunswick. I have returned back to
Brantford in January 2006. The moment I give birth to
this child, they will be apprehending. With all the
lies and false accusations, they will not let me keep
the baby. The main one is that I'm being told that my
parenting skills are not appropriate or so they say.
I have been more then cooperative with the Society
over the years. Yet no matter what I've said and
done, they seem to find faults.
I want to raise this child and be able to nurture
her. But the Children's Aid Society is bound
determined to make sure that this does not occur.
I am asking for your help because you are a
government figure for our County and I believe that
there could be a way that you could be of assistance.
Please help me sir to keep this child.
Sincerely,
Nathalie
Brantford ON N3R 1Y9
(519) 753 - 2720
Here is a letter to Andrea Horwath in support of her
effort to get the Ontario Ombudsman to have authority to
look into Children's Aid. It is one of the three most
common kinds of case — the divorce continuation.
A parent already separated tries to get CAS to protect
their child from the other parent. In Dufferin, when
complaints become annoying to CAS, they take the child
permanently away from the complaining parent. As is
typical in child protection cases, the family supports
the NDP. The letter is posted with permission of the
author, who says that there is no ban on publishing her
case or her name.
expand
collapse
| From: |
rkergan1@cogeco.ca |
| To: |
ahorwath-qc@ndp.on.ca |
| Cc: |
rtmq@stn |
| Sent: |
Saturday, March 18, 2006 1:16 PM |
| Subject: |
ombudsman involvement with cas |
Dear Ms. Horwath
Re: Collins, York and CAS Hamilton
My (now) ex, myself, and, my son (now almost 10)
have been in court for almost five years. In October
2005 Justice Czutrin decided at the first Status
Review (initiated in February 2004) that the case was
not about child protection but custody and access. We
are currently in court on the custody cross-claim
(initiated after the child protection application by
necessity). CAS is still involved - not in
supervising my ex's care of my son but in providing
supervised access for me.
My ex is registered on the Ontario Child Abuse
Registry since 1984 for physically assaulting his
nephew. The nephew (then aged 15) had visible
injuries and was reluctant (he had been threatened) to
report these. It was his probation officer who called
CAS. The ex's nephew was made a crown ward and
Hamilton Police did an investigation but did not
charge the ex because the nephew was unwilling to
testify and they felt the situation did not
necessitate it with the Crown Wardship order.
My ex has an extensive criminal record including
assaults, unlawful use of a firearm (resulting in a
death), and, sexual assaults.
My ex has had charge of my son since he was five.
I allowed my son to be placed with my ex on a
temporary basis to prevent him from becoming a crown
ward. (CAS Hamilton ridiculously prolonged the case
and was never trial ready.) the child's placement with
my ex was under CAS supervision. The order respecting
this supervision was made on consent and ordered by
Justice M. Bennotto in June 2001. The order was
three pages long respecting the supervision with one
paragraph respecting my access. I felt confident CAS
Hamilton would enforce all of the provisions of the
order and adequately supervise the ex's care of my
child - they never did.
In July 2001 I reported possible alcohol abuse by
my ex to CAS and Police. Police refused to
investigate and CAS After Hours refused to attend
while the ex was intoxicated yelling and threatening
me on the phone with my child crying in the
background. They didn't feel this was an emergency so
they waited until sometime on Monday or Tuesday to
investigate. The investigation consisted of asking
the ex if he was drinking and he of course denied it
saying I suffer "mental illness" problems. THey
refused to send the ex for drug tests and stated there
were no concerns.
In September and October 2001 I made belated
reports to CAS Hamilton because I made immediate calls
to Hamilton Police over the threats. Police did
attend at the ex's and the ex told his stories. I did
receive occurrence numbers and later charged the ex
privately in 2003 (as this continued). My charges
were thrown out of Ontario Court (Criminal Division)
because CAS was involved and there was a trial pending
in Family Court. The trial never occurred.
I started to contact the Office of Child and Family
Services in September 2001 about the care situation
but they refused involvement because my son was not in
CAS care.
The Office of the Child and Family Services
suggested I study the CFSA legislation (which I began
to) and I also obtained a copy of the 2000 Ontario
Spectrum of Service and Risk Assessment Guidelines.
They also encouraged the CAS internal review process.
I have been minimally (if at all) satisfied with
the internal review process at CAS Hamilton. I have
gone through it about four times. THe first time I
used the procedure of social work supervisor, (Sheila
Penney now a manager), director, executive director,
and Board of Directors. This process advises a "wait
and see" as you move up. It is lengthy and inadequate
and does not immediate address protection needs of
children at risk.
At the director stage (Ingrid Hauth) in the first
complaint procedure (November 2001) became enraged
interrupting a court ordered parent capacity
assessment with a motion to have the court assessor
replaced with one of their own choosing. With each
complaint some sort of Court Motion was filed with
orders that eventually eroded my rights to my son
little by little. CAS Hamilton's mental illness
allegations increased with the overall undertone that
my concerns for my child were a mental illness
problem. THe concerns were never fully investigated
and CAS kept saying there were no concerns.
In 2004 I started writing the letters in
quadruplicate all at once only to be referred to the
supervisor level.
I've written the Ministry in September 2005 when my
son had further physical injuries which were (as
usual) suspicious and sent out quadruplicates to CAS
to all levels in the complaint procedure only to
receive a letter back from the Ministry in October
2005 advising me of the internal complaints procedure
(the letter to the Ministry noted all the copies
already sent to CAS Hamilton).
The result from CAS Hamilton was that they informed
the school to advise CAS Hamilton if they saw
injuries. This is ridiculous as it was the social
worker who saw the injuries at my supervised access
and did nothing more than question the child taking
his word.
That particular injury was a very large bruise and
swelling of the child's forehead which the child
stated occurred playing ball at school when a ball hit
him. I doubt very much that a ball would or could
impact a child's head causing that severe an injury.
At the very least this should have been assessed by a
doctor. The social worker (Nicole Wilcox) either left
or was fired from CAS Hamilton. She is working
(negligently) elsewhere with some other vulnerable
victim such as my son.
My son has had numerous bruises around his eyes, a
broken foot, staph infections near his mouth, etc.
The broken foot took four days to be seen by a doctor,
the mouth infection was immediately investigated by an
after hours worker. Most of the time any
investigation is minimal and very much after the fact
when evidence is non-existent.
My son is afraid. At the initial start of the
intervention in 2001 my son was upset after his
grandfather died because he was used to having my full
attention. CAS Hamilton put in affidavit material the
very day of the temporary care hearing threatening an
application for crown wardship. It stated my son said
I hit him leaving red marks and bruises. In 2004 a
review of the case notes revealed the worker asked
leading questions and omitted the fact the child
stated "but these go away after I go to my room for
awhile". I am quite sure my son sees the result of
this is losing his mother and so he will endure abuse
at any length and not report it afraid of losing his
father. My son is in need of psychological
intervention and he should have had prompt thorough
investigation of his injuries.
CAS Hamilton and mCSS has, and continue to, fail my
child with their gross negligence. This is an
overfunded agency making use of their funding to abuse
situations and to accommodate the whims and fancies of
their social workers and the power mongering of the
director.
I believe with my son's eighteenth birthday he has
a very possible lawsuit against the Province of
Ontario for the existing legislative scheme which
doesn't protect children in "kinship care cases". I
think Bill 210 is very dangerous in that it promotes
CAS to provide kinship care that doesn't fall under
the Office of Child and Family Services. CAS'
accountability when they are supposed to be
supervising a child's care seems to include mostly
their own discretion in investigation and management.
Bill 210 would take the minimal right of a child's
outside complaint procedure for CAS care cases and
abolish that. My situation illustrates what already
has, and is happening. with cases of vulnerable
children that have no recourse except the ridiculous
CAS internal procedure.
I am of the opinion the internal investigation
procedure is useless and should be abolished entirely.
All it seems to be is an excuse for supervisors and
managers to discuss a situation internally on the
versional story from a social worker and supervisor
without the complainant's presence to fully explain
the situation and defend the CAS allegations. The
meetings aren't taken seriously, the worker or
supervisor makes allegations about the complaining
parent, and not much is done.
I have contacted the Ombudsman's Office by phone
only to be told to not even write because they can't
do anything or get involved with CAS. I believe the
Ombudsman's Office not only should have a right to
investigate these situations but be given extra
funding (perhaps out of the CAS budget) to do so.
I am thoroughly disgusted there was so much public
uproar over the Liberal government's sponsorship
scandal and our public money, but so little is done
about these atrocities concerning our vulnerable
children. I applaud the efforts of the NDP on this
issue and hope and pray you win the next provincial
election.
Please try to help my child.
Angelique Collins
The following story is typical of CAS intervention in
the life of a young couple. Since CAS ordinarily
retaliates against families going public, we have
omitted the name, phone number and CAS venue.
expand
collapse
March 15, 2006
My issues with the CAS are as follows. When I call
my worker it takes days for a reply. I am a part of
the groups that have been assigned to me through CAS.
My social worker has made no attempt to inquire of my
progress, yet insists that she needs good reports.
She says that my boyfriend and myself are not working
with the society, yet we have attempted to do every
group meeting and every letter that has been set out
for us. She has cancelled meetings, not shown up and
has only met with me three times since my children
were taken into care, a total of five months. My
worker says that I cannot have unsupervised visits
with my children. because it is court orders that
visits be through and at the discretion of the CAS.
Visits now take place at my mother's, under her
supervision, not CAS's. My two daughters are
presently in the same foster home and frequently show
up at sessions, dirty, hungry and refusing to go back
to the foster home. The two girls are often left in
the care of the teenage children in the foster home.
My son (8 months) has only been introduced to beginner
cereal. I brought this up with the worker, she told
me that she had no concerns. When I discuss things
that my 6 year old says to me, the worker says that
the child does not know what she is talking about.
The worker showed up in the court and claimed that
(boyfriend) has not done any drug testing, to her
knowledge, because she does not have the results. We
went to the doctor who did the test and got copies of
the results, that day they were faxed to the worker.
There have been other cases held open for months for
the same reason, the excuse being that they are
waiting for a fax which they had received previously,
this seems to be a trait with CAS.
The reasons the children were taken into care, were
neglect (thumb sucking, diaper rashes and ability to
talk to our 6 yr. old appropriately). Lately CAS has
apologized, regarding the diaper rash and the thumb
also having a rash. Since being in care the problem
is still present and is not going away. It is time
that CAS listens to doctors and takes their advice and
not jump to conclusions. Drug abuse (he has been six
months clean and done related counselling)
homelessness, domestic violence (1 time incident of
him pushing me, no police reports were ever filed) and
mental health (I take antidepressants) and I see a
psychologist. The Children's Aid have started a court
action against me and are asking for 6 month wardship,
even though the children have been in care for 5
months and everything they have asked me to do is
almost complete. We are having a hard time with the
housing because I cannot work due to the groups. We
have almost saved up enough money and will have our
own place in April.
I feel that in most cases that CAS abuse the entire
family by separating all members. We are desperate to
receive help in order to get our children returned to
us. We believe that we have carried out CAS's
requests in order to do this, but it appears that
nothing is going to please them and that we will never
get rid of CAS from our lives.
Please feel free to contact me at 000-000-0000. I
have lots more information to add to this.
Dead Children in Manitoba
March 21, 2006
The disclosure of a large number of children dying in
foster care has provoked a scandal in Manitoba. The
article below shows efforts to contain the scandal
without any real disclosure. A group composed entirely
of functionaries of the child protection system will
investigate and prepare a report which will of suggest
more money and power for child protectors. Only full
public disclosure of the facts has any hope of
contributing to a solution of the problems.
expand
collapse
Winnipeg Sun
March 21, 2006
Probes launched
Gov't to review foster care deaths
By ROCHELLE SQUIRES, LEGISLATURE REPORTER
Family Services and Housing Minister Christene
Melnick addressed an external review of cases of
children in care at a news conference at The
Legislative Building today. (C. PROCAYLO, Sun)
After facing public outrage over the deaths of
numerous children killed in foster care, the province
announced yesterday it will commission two
reviews.
Nine foster children were murdered in Manitoba last
year and a total of 31 children in care have been
killed since 2000.
"The death of one child is too many. It's
important to review concerns raised over recent
developments and to work together to make the
necessary changes we believe will improve services to
children in care," said NDP Family Services Minister
Christine Melnick.
An external review will focus on the opening and
closing of cases of children in care, how files are
transferred and the caseload of front-line social
workers.
INTERIM REPORT IN JUNE
The external probe will be led by Manitoba
ombudsman Irene Hamilton, Children's Advocate Director
Billie Schibler and an Ontario child and family
services director.
It will also involve the CEOs of the four
aboriginal child and family service authorities in
Manitoba.
An interim report will be provided in June and a
final report in September.
An internal probe will also be conducted and led by
Hamilton, Schibler and Jim Newton, director of
psychology at the Manitoba Adolescent Treatment
Centre.
The aim of that review is to look at how cases are
managed and the administrative and financial areas of
CFS. Interviews will be conducted with CFS staff.
"This is not a witch hunt," said Melnick. "These
reviews will help guide improvements so we can
continue to build a strong and high-quality care
system for children in the care of CFS."
Schibler said her office has received many calls
since the deaths of little Phoenix Sinclair and Heaven
Traverse came to light.
Sinclair was murdered three months after her case
was closed with CFS and Traverse died while in foster
care.
"The general public is wanting to know, and I feel
very confident in the people who will be working with
our office and myself as we go into examining these
matters," said Schibler.
Meanwhile, opposition Tories and Liberals continue
to press the premier to remove Melnick from her
cabinet post.
"This minister of family services has failed
Phoenix Sinclair and she's failed all Manitobans,"
said Opposition Leader Stuart Murray in the house
yesterday.
'ROOT CAUSES'
Vince Surbey, whose adopted son Chris, 17, was
murdered last summer while in the care of CFS, said
yesterday he's pleased the reviews have been called,
but isn't sure they will have the desired effect.
"Whether it goes far enough remains to be seen," he
said. "I think the reviews can be useful in helping
point out where there are problems but it won't get to
the root causes.
"Some procedures might be changed, but they
basically have to do an overhaul of the whole system
of returning children (to parents)."
Chris Surbey, who lived with fetal alcohol spectrum
disorder, was placed in CFS care by his parents at age
12 because he needed constant supervision to contain
fits of irrational behaviour.
At the time he was killed, Chris had been left
alone in his apartment after his youth worker left for
the day, despite his parents' warnings that he needed
24-hour supervision.
CAS Fights Back
March 16, 2006
Our observer in Hamilton reports that CAS is fighting
back against the calls for Ombudsman oversight. The
following is an account of the TV coverage on Wednesday,
March 15:
expand
collapse
As a social worker goes into a house to apprehend a
baby and young child, it's reported she is stabbed in
the hands. The camera crew has her on the news
wrapped hands and all, dozens of cops all over the
place, parents pinned to the house, mom's hands behind
her back, looks extremely distressed and in pain,
getting arrested, there are a bunch of concerned area
residents (all home in the middle of the day) telling
the reporter about the goings-on at the house, people
going in and out at all hours and in and out though
windows.
It is reported to be the messiest most disgusting
home anyone has ever entered, but no film of the
inside. Four police offices had to go back to the
station to be treated for lice. Lice?
I worked for public health — lice don't fall
from ceilings and you don't get them from entering a
home, they are not that easily transmitted in adults.
But it makes the apprehension seem all so extremely
urgent. And how did the camera crew get there to see
it all unfold? If indeed the parents are spending the
night in a jail, they should be charged in the morning
with the assault on the social worker, since I assume
this would be in a criminal court. Is it not public
record?
Addendum: The Hamilton Spectator had a similar
story. A woman was arrested for defending her family
against CAS. Failure to name the woman makes
independent verification impossible.
expand
collapse
The Hamilton Spectator
CAS workers attacked, mom charged
(Mar 17, 2006)
A Hamilton mother has been charged after Children's
Aid Society workers were attacked.
Police were called to a William Street home after
two CAS workers had gone to pick up two children
Wednesday.
While a worker went into a bedroom to get clothes
for the kids, the 25-year-old mother allegedly got
into an argument with the other worker, then pushed
and hit her. Police say the other worker rushed from
the bedroom and was attacked.
Police say the mother then grabbed a knife from the
kitchen and swung it at one of the workers, slightly
cutting her hand. The other worker managed to rush
out of the home with her cellphone and call
police.
The mother was charged with assault with a weapon
and two counts of assault.
Child Protector Dead
March 16, 2006
A child-protection administrator has been found
apparently murdered in Texas.
expand
collapse
San Antonio Express-News
Child agency supervisor dead
Web Posted: 03/16/2006 12:00 AM CST
Jeorge Zarazua
Express-News Staff Writer
The body of a missing Child Protective Services
administrator was found Wednesday in a field outside
Victoria, two days after she last told a friend she
was settling in for the night.
Sally Ann Blackwell, 53, was reported missing Tuesday
after she failed to show up for work and her daughters
immediately feared her job might have played a role in
her disappearance.
Victoria police notified the daughters shortly after 5
p.m. Wednesday that Blackwell's body had been found
in a field off U.S. 59 and Hanselman Road, southeast
of Victoria, said Kirsten Menie, a family spokeswoman.
The cause of death wasn't immediately known, but
police told the Victoria Advocate they were treating
the case as a homicide.
Menie said the daughters were too distraught to talk.
"Nobody is able to communicate, to tell you the
truth," she said.
Menie said the family continues to believe Blackwell
was a victim of foul play.
Blackwell
"Right now there are endless possibilities," she said.
"I don't necessarily think the police are just
clueless."
The family offered a $5,000 reward for information
about the case, according to the Associated Press.
Earlier Wednesday, Tina Taulbee said her stepmother
had spoken of threats she had been receiving at work.
"In the 15 or 16 years she has been there, this is the
first time she was actually scared," Taulbee said.
Taulbee, 37, of San Antonio, said she didn't know
details of the threats, but said it was in connection
with one of the cases the CPS program director's
office was handling.
Blackwell oversaw caseworkers in nine South Texas
counties, including Bexar.
Patrick Crimmins, a spokesman for the Texas Department
of Family and Protective Services in Austin, confirmed
Wednesday that someone threatened Blackwell in her
office last week.
But he said the agency hasn't received any information
Blackwell's death was related to her work.
"We're obviously shocked and filled with sadness,"
Crimmins said. "We, of course, were hoping for a
happier outcome. She was very, very well known in the
Victoria community. She was well-liked,
well-respected.
"Everyone is kind of at a loss for words."
Lt. Mike Hernandez of the Victoria Police Department
said a search had been launched for Blackwell in that
area early Wednesday, but investigators failed to find
her body.
Hernandez declined to say what led investigators to
suspect she might have been there, saying it was part
of the ongoing investigation.
"No suspects have been identified," he said.
Hernandez said a county work crew found Blackwell's
body lying just on the other side of a fence on
Hanselman Road. There were no apparent signs of how
she might have died, he said.
An autopsy has been ordered for today.
According to Taulbee, investigators found the door to
her stepmother's home open and her dog locked up in
the garage. Blackwell's car was left at the house.
She said the only thing that appeared missing was
Blackwell's purse.
Blackwell, a former University of Texas cheerleader,
joined CPS in 1990 as a caseworker in the Cuero
office, and in 1998 became a supervisor.
In 2001, she was promoted to CPS program director,
overseeing 46 caseworkers, their supervisors and
additional support staff in nine counties.
Taulbee said Blackwell was passionate about helping
abused children.
"I think that she did what she needed to do to protect
the people who couldn't protect themselves," she said.
Crimmins said the incident last week at Blackwell's
office "did not escalate" into anything that would
have required police intervention.
"It was handled at the time," he said, adding it's not
uncommon for CPS workers to be threatened.
The Child Protective Services Division of the Texas
Department of Family and Protective Services
investigates reports of abuse and neglect of children,
and, if necessary, places children in foster care,
Crimmins said.
He said employees receive training about workplace
violence, dealing with difficult or hostile clients,
and personal security.
Crimmins said the news of Blackwell's death spread
quickly Wednesday among CPS caseworkers throughout the
state.
"There is a strong bond between people that do this
for a living," he said. "The jobs are very, very
tough; very, very demanding."
Counselors were scheduled to consult with Blackwell's
30 co-workers today at the Victoria office because of
her disappearance, Crimmins said.
"That's obviously going to be more important than ever
now," he said.
jzarazua@express-news.net
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Addendum: The incident was unrelated to the
victim's responsibilities in child protection.
expand
collapse
Jeffrey Frank Grimsinger, 25, got 20 years for kidnapping and a life
sentence for murder. He admitted killing Sally Ann Blackwell, 53.
Her relatives said they were satisfied with the sentences.
T.C. BAKER: VICTORIA ADVOCATE
Jan. 11, 2008, 10:06PM
CPS supervisor's murderer gets a life term in plea deal
Killer evades death penalty in '06 Victoria slaying
By ALLAN TURNER, Houston Chronicle
Subdued and avoiding eye contact with his victim's family, a
25-year-old construction worker Friday pleaded guilty to the 2006
kidnap-murder of Victoria Child Protective Services supervisor Sally Ann
Blackwell.
Jeffrey Frank Grimsinger, who faced the possibility of a death sentence
had the case gone to trial, agreed to a 20-year sentence for kidnapping
and a life sentence for murder. The sentences — assessed in the Victoria
court of state District Judge Skipper Koetter — will run consecutively.
Blackwell, 53, disappeared from her Victoria home on March 14, 2006.
Her rope-trussed body was found the next day in a field southeast of town.
She had been sexually assaulted and strangled.
The killer is the son of Michael Grimsinger, who said he had dated
Blackwell intermittently since 1995. Earlier on the night of her death,
the elder Grimsinger told the San Antonio Express-News in a 2006
interview, Blackwell had visited his home to discuss renewing their
relationship.
'He acted impulsively'
The younger Grimsinger stared into his lap as relatives of his victim
addressed the court Friday. "He never made eye contact with them," said
Victoria County Sheriff T. Michael O'Connor, whose office led the
investigation.
The victim's sister, Mary Allaway of Austin, told the court she
remembered Blackwell as "a precious, trusting little sister."
"I remember Sally as a strong, intelligent woman who worked hard and
made a positive difference in this world," Allaway said later.
When asked why he had murdered Blackwell, Grimsinger responded, "I
don't know."
"I don't know that he's a great orator," said Victoria County District
Attorney Steve Tyler. "He might not even fully understand himself. He
acted impulsively."
Tyler said the killer had expressed remorse for the crime.
Investigators linked Jeffrey Grimsinger to the murder by DNA evidence
found beneath his victim's fingernails and on a cigarette butt discovered
at the crime scene. His fingerprints also were found at Blackwell's home.
In addition, Tyler said, Grimsinger confessed to authorities and his
father.
The prosecutor said he crafted the plea agreement rather than go to
trial because capital prosecution "would have been difficult for the
family and very expensive for the community."
"I believe this sentence is just, and that is what I am duty-bound to
obtain," he said.
M.P. Eaves, district attorney at the time of the murder, said in
November 2006 that he intended to seek the death penalty for Grimsinger.
Eaves declined Friday to comment on his successor's plea agreement with
Grimsinger.
Allaway said she is pleased with Tyler's handling of the case.
Blackwell's daughter, Amanda Taulbee, concurred, noting she is grateful to
be spared the trauma of a trial. "I am confident Jeff Grimsinger will
spend the rest of his natural life in prison," she said.
Victoria County has sent three killers to death row since executions
resumed in Texas in 1982.
Remembered fondly
Blackwell joined Child Protective Services in 1990 as a caseworker in
Cuero. At the time of her death, she was a program director overseeing 46
caseworkers and other staff in nine counties.
"Those of us who were fortunate enough to have worked with Sally
Blackwell will always remember her energy, her optimism and her commitment
not only to the children of our state, but also to her co-workers in Child
Protective Services," agency spokesman Patrick Crimmins said. "We choose
to remember her life."
allan.turner@chron.com
More CAS Foot-dragging
March 16, 2006
John Dunn has sent a letter to
the Ministry of Children and Youth Services (pdf).
It details the foot-dragging by the ministry and local
children's aid societies in denying clients copies of
the complaint procedure.
CAS Sued
March 16, 2006
Canada Court Watch has posted a copy of a lawsuit by Raymond Paquette against Lanark
Children's Aid. The facts disclose it as the same case
dealt with at length in a series of stories by Dave Brown in the Ottawa
Citizen in April 1999. The story given here from the
suit is one-sided, but Mr Brown's is not.
Since the oldest child is now over the age of 18, he
can sue on his own behalf. He is Raymond Paquette, born
on November 20, 1987 to mother Lorena Kerr and father
Marc Paquette. In 1991 Children's Aid seized Raymond
from his parents, placing them with Lorena's sister,
Margo Hunter.
Hand written case notes signed by Ms. Denise Unhola
an ex-employee of the defendant CAS disclose that
Raymond was audio/video taped:
- November 20, 1991 at the Ottawa-Carleton Police
Station
- April 13, 1992 at the home of Margo Hunter
- April 27, 1992 at the home of Margo Hunter
- December 2, 1992 at the home of Margo Hunter
- December 14, 1992 at the home of Margo Hunter
There are unidentified persons on these videotapes
and others standing outside the camera view helping the
interviewers. The content of the recordings is not
described in the suit, but given standard practice in
the field, social workers likely tried (and succeeded)
to get four- and five-year-old Raymond to make
incriminating statements about his parents. The suit
calls it brainwashing.
In support of the protection application CAS
manufactured the following facts, all later shown to be
false. Raymond's father:
- sexually abused Raymond
- shot Raymond's brother in the face with a shotgun
- slit Raymond's throat leaving a six inch scar
- burned the hair off Raymond and his two siblings
with a rainbow colored lighter
In 1992 CAS got $7000 from the Criminal Injuries
Compensation Board on behalf of Raymond, but did not
return the money to him on his eighteenth birthday,
November 20, 2005.
On May 7, 1998 Ottawa CAS filed a protection
application for twin half-brothers born to Larena Kerr
and her then-partner Jack Hepworth.
In November 1998 when it became apparent that the
parents Hepworth and Kerr were winning in that child
protection case, Ottawa CAS protection worker Mark
Arnold advised CAS to adopt out Raymond Paquette and his
sister and brother to Margo Hunter as quickly as
possible. The permanency of adoption would place the
children beyond the power of the courts to return the
children to their parents. The adoptions were completed
in December 1998 without notifying the parents.
Hand-written case notes by Ottawa CAS social worker
Brenda Williams confirm that the adoption was in bad
faith.
On February 15 and 16, 1999 judge Robert Fournier
found that the case was fabricated by CAS, a ruling not
appealed by CAS. But since the three oldest children
had already been adopted, they were not returned to the
parents, only the baby twins were returned.
Here are the formalities:
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
Court File Number CV/06/33958
Raymond Paquette (Plaintiff)
17 Cherly Road
Ottawa, Ontario K2G 0V5
Phone: (613) 228-0368
CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF THE COUNTY
OF LANARK AND THE TOWN OF SMITH FALLS
Defendant
8 Herriott Street
Perth, Ontario K7H 1S9
Phone: (613) 264-1500
Fax: (613) 264-0067
Lawyer for the Defendant:
Ms. Nicky Edmundson-Mosher
Letter to Andrea Horwath
March 14, 2006
Here is a letter to Andrea Horwath on the subject
of Children's Aid. This is posted with permission of
the author, who has requested that the names of her
own family be deleted. We have omitted her signature
and changed her husband's name to husband.
expand
collapse
Monday March 13, 2006
Brantford Children's Aid Society
On June 22, 2005 I met with one of your intake
workers, LeeAnne Wood, in my home along with my
husband and children. LeeAnne came out to investigate
a complaint about my baby walking down the street with
a beer bottle. At that time as far as she was
concerned this did not happen. She asked us a series
of questions. After she was finished she left and
told us she would be in touch.
On August 4, 2005 we met with the CAS again we were
told they were concerned about our 'fighting' because
we had told LeeAnne during the interview in our home
that we occasionally argue. At that point we were
informed the case would be transferred to a worker.
We met the new worker, Katia Carrunza, who told us
husband, needed to go to anger management; an
alcohol assessment and I had to attend domestic
violence counselling. We followed through with these
suggestions to get your organization out of our lives.
During my domestic violence counselling I was advised
by the counsellor I did not need to attend this class
because it was not applicable to my situation. I got
the okay from Katia to discontinue this class. She
advised me to take a different class which interfered
with my school and was going to cost me money that I
really could not afford. She then told me I had done
what was asked of me and I did not need to take this
class.
Husband did his anger management and also
had to pay for it after he was told it would be of no
cost to him. He also completed his alcohol assessment
and was told he could have some counselling on this
matter but, it was not necessary. In the meantime
husband has quit drinking completely in fear
the CAS will again use this against him.
On numerous occasions I called Katia and was unable
to reach her, I would leave messages and she would not
return my call. I eventually tried calling her
supervisor, Trish Johnson, who told me I would have to
discuss these matters with Katia. Trish gave me a
time when Katia was expected to be in the office but
despite my continuous phone calls I was not able to
reach her nor did she return my phone calls. I often
left detailed messages about when I would be home or
if she could reach me at my mothers and I found she
would call my home at a time when I told her I would
not be there. In my opinion she was calling my home
and leaving a message to avoid talking to me
personally.
On October 14, 2005 I received a phone call from
Katia around 4:00 in the afternoon, she advised me to
stay away from my biological father (who I have no
relationship with at all, nor had I seen in years.)
She continued to tell me not to look for him, and to
keep the children away from him, she even went to the
point to tell me to lock my doors. (This led me to
believe he had made a direct threat toward me and my
family.) If I did not abide by this the agency would
have reason to apprehend the children. I tried to get
more information from her. She told me I could meet
with her in her office on Monday, October 17, 2005, in
the meantime I had no idea what was going on or what
to think. I was terrified. This was unnecessary
information to be passed on to me and especially
without any detail as to why the call was placed to me
in the first place considering I had no contact with
this particular individual.
During the week of November 7, 2005 I believe it
was Tuesday November 8th husband and I had an
appointment with Katia in our home to close our case.
That afternoon around 2:00 I received a phone call on
Katia's behalf stating the meeting would have to be
cancelled that an emergency had arose. For the
remainder of that week I had called Katia everyday to
reschedule and consistently got her answering machine
which stated "Today is Thursday November 3rd I will be
in and out of the office today, tomorrow Friday
November 4th, I will not be in the office...." I
continued to call during the week of the 14th and was
still unable to reach Katia.
At 10:30 am on Thursday February 23 I received a
message from Katia to call her back. On the 24th I
called Katia at 2:00 I left a message on her machine,
her message stated "Today is Wed. Feb. 22, I will be
out of the office....". I called again on Monday
February 27 at 9:10 am and left a message, called
again at 11am, and 1:30pm and left a message both
times. On Feb.28 I called the office and asked for
Katia's supervisor, I was directed to a Dorothy
Shween. I left her a detailed message about all the
times I tried to contact Katia and asked her to return
my call. I called Dorothy again on March 1, when I
spoke to her she informed me she was the secretary for
that particular division of CAS and there was no
supervisor the workers report to a temporary
supervisor that changes on a daily basis. She also
advised me I could reach Katia right after lunch. I
called Katia right after lunch and actually spoke to
her, she told me she had not received any reports from
the classes we had attended. She told me as soon as
she receives all of this information she can close our
file because she has not heard of any problems in the
past 8 months. I called Nova Vita and spoke to the
counsellor of the class I had taken there who informed
me she had faxed the letter to Katia On October
25,2005. She asked my permission to call and talk to
Katia about the letter. The counsellor called me back
to say Katia had received the letter in October. My
husband called the lady he was dealing with for the
alcohol assessment who agreed to resend the
assessment. This is now March 13 and once again I
have not heard anything from Katia.
Praise for CAS
March 11, 2006
The Hamilton Spectator prints an article today in
praise of the Children's Aid Society. It omits one
important fact, which we give following the article.
expand
collapse
Giving children a better life
By Michael P. Shea, Superintendent, Corporate
Services Division, Hamilton Police Service
The Hamilton Spectator(Mar 11, 2006)
Re: 'Crown wards: stories of struggle and
survival' and 'Kids at risk face harsh adjustment'
(both March 7)
These stories accurately identified not only a
growing problem within our community, but the
importance of a timely and compassionate response by
child protection workers.
The successes identified in these articles are not
accidental.
They are the result of dedicated and committed
staff doing everything in their power to make life
better for our most vulnerable members -- our
children.
The staff of the Children's Aid Society of
Hamilton, from the executive director to the
front-line workers, are second to none.
I am proud to be associated with such a caring and
professional organization.
They do make a difference.
An endorsement of Children's Aid from an informed
outsider, a police superintendent. The article omits
|