“Reasonable grounds for suspicion” refers to the information that an average person, using normal and honest judgment would need to be suspicious.
Story 1 of 3
Barbara Kay: "Children's aid societies gone rogue."
Judge Harper wrote that that the father was lucky to “dig out from under the avalanche thrust upon him,” and that “the scars to the children” were permanent. In summary, “This was exacerbated by the actions of the Society, some police officers, some women’s groups and a school board.
The mother was, to put it mildly — confirmed by recordings, e-mails and text messages — unreliable and manipulative. The three boys repeatedly alerted the CAS to their mother’s violence, alcoholism and sexual indiscretions. Yet the CAS blithely ignored all evidence to the contrary of their own settled conviction that the mother deserved their support.
Finally the mother accused her oldest son of trying to kill her, which brought the family into criminal court.
Judge Harper assigned two-thirds of the court costs to the CAS — a record $1.4 million — and $604,500 to the mother.
He had scathing words for the CAS, whom he charged with becoming “a lead advocate” for the mother and the driving force for the trial.
He said that the agency went to great lengths to smother any evidence that countered their theory.
It was revealed at trial that mandatory document-sharing (file disclosure) was running a year late, and that one CAS supervisor, tasked with providing information to lawyers, had removed 475 pages of notes, records, summaries and emails from the file. (This, by the way, is a criminal offence, although to my knowledge the supervisor has not been charged.) Judge Harper also noted that meetings were held to discuss how to protect the mother and case workers from the father.
Judge Harper also said the society has a statutory duty to reassess and amend their position when new information that countered their theories became available. The society failed to do this.
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/barbara-kay-childrens-aid-societies-gone-rogue
Story 2 of 3
"CAS vows to appeal ruling of ‘bad faith."
“We stand by our decision to seek a child protection application in this matter.”
“We don’t make these decisions lightly and we take into consideration the opinions of other professionals and in this case we did so,” said Fitzgerald, referring to consultations with police, women’s groups and school officials.
Last week, Superior Court Justice John Harper slapped the CAS with a $1.4-million court bill and had harsh words for the agency, saying it failed to properly investigate a mother’s version of events in a divorce and custody battle, even when three children tried to alert authorities of the woman’s violence, alcoholism and manipulation.
http://www.lfpress.com/2014/04/14/cas-vows-to-defend-ruling-of-bad-faith
Story 3 of 3
THE BIG STORY LEFT OUT OF NEWSPAPER IN ONTARIO.
Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex v. C.B.D.: Interests of the Children Lead to Quashing of Appeal in Child Protection Context Mark Gelowitz. Oct 31, 2014.
Though the Ontario children's aid society has claimed for years family courts judges provide important oversight in child protection matters (which doesn't appear to be in their job description) the family court judge in this case did nothing at all to prevent this tragedy and if anything was a contributing factor.
But as it turns out some judges like outside the family courts Judge Harper do provide important oversight and insight into the many faces of Ontario children's aid society.
Quashing an appeal for lack of merit is an extreme remedy. But occasionally, when very little merit coincides with another social interest, an appeal can be quashed for a combination of reasons. Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex v. C.B.D., released October 9, 2014, is an example of this, as the Ontario Court of Appeal quashed the appeal of the Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex (the “Society”) from a decision refusing to impose a child protection order. The Court held that the appeal had very little merit, and the interests of the children mandated that the appeal be quashed.
https://www.osler.com/en/blogs/appeal/october-2014/children-s-aid-society-of-london-and-middlesex-v
WHY WEREN'T THE PROBLEMS WITH THE SOCIETY'S CASE DETECTED IN THE FAMILY COURTS?
It should not be a matter of "win" or "lose" when it comes to Ontario child welfare law. Ontario's Child and Family Services Act tells us that the paramount purpose is to "promote the best interests, protection and well being of children." One might note the glaring lack of any reference to family. In fact, there is a paucity of references to family throughout the entire CFSA even though many judges recognize the importance of maintaining family whenever possible.
I had a recent experience with CAS counsel at court when representing a family unjustly caught up in the system. Our office had prepared a very persuasive and comprehensive response to the Society's Application. We attended at the mandated five day hearing that follows apprehensions from parental care. The CAS certainly had not expected such forcefulness; normally parents are so overwhelmed at this early stage that they are unable to mount an effective defence. Generally, the court will rubber stamp the CAS requests. We did not agree to just stand idly by at the first appearance and CAS counsel was surprised by our aggressive (yet fair) approach.
Our written material seemed to have persuaded the judge. He instructed the lawyers to prepare a consent endorsement along the lines that we were seeking (which of course included an immediate return of the children to parental care). As we were returning to the courtroom after preparing the consent, the experienced and respected CAS counsel turned to me and my clients and remarked: "This is the third time your lawyer has beaten me."
The CAS counsel's comment was made innocently enough and indeed was intended to be complimentary. But still I was shocked (but probably should not have been). Why was I so shocked?
By Gene C. Colman of Gene C. Colman Family Law Centre posted in Child Welfare on Thursday, January 1, 2015.
https://www.complexfamilylaw.com/blog/2015/01/cas-attitude-win-child-welfare-cases-at-all-costs.shtml
The Motherisk Commission details years of rights infringements by courts. "If the same problems were identified in criminal court, there would be a huge public outcry." Tammy Law.
Tammy Law's delusional thoughts, excuses, rationalizations and justifications for using the Motherisk test to justify denying parents due process and circumventing the Constitution, the Charter of Rights and the principles of fundamental Justice behind the closed doors of Ontario's family courts.
Posted on February 27, 2018 by Tammy Law
After 2 years, and the review of more than 1200 cases, the Motherisk Commission came out with its report yesterday. The Report is required reading for everyone who has any role to play in child welfare – social workers, lawyers, courts, litigants. It describes a system that is dysfunctional, unfair, and undignified. In addition to its criticism of how CASs have handled drug addiction.
I want to be clear about what I think some of the fundamental problems are and how I think we can start to change this system. Because I am first and foremost a lawyer, my thoughts naturally focus on the role of lawyers in this mess. My thoughts are summarized as follows:
As lawyers, we need to recognize that good intentions are not enough. It is really easy to hide behind “the best interests of the child” and agree or acquiesce to all types of infringements of our clients’ basic human and Charter rights. This needs to stop. Lawyers need to start seeing their role in the context of defending our clients’ very real rights to human dignity and security of the person.
The culture of cooperation has gone too far. While I agree that it is very very important to work with the Children’s Aid Society to address their concerns, a line must be drawn when they demand cooperation that crosses the line. As a state agent, the Society has an obligation to ensure that it works in the most minimally intrusive way possible – respecting the client’s right to individual freedom while trying to ensure that its clients are served. This is a difficult job. Lawyers and courts should be there to ensure that the fine line is respected.
Society counsel need to understand that they have a public interest role. They should be providing advice to their clients in the context of being a public interest litigant. They have a duty to the court to be fair. This means that if unreliable evidence is being tendered (and there were many signs of this with respect to the Motherisk testing), they should be advising their clients about the unfairness of relying on it. Lawyers are and should be gatekeepers of evidence as much as courts are.
We need to be more vigilant. As noted in the report, our role as advocates is to raise every defence possible for our clients.
HOW ABOUT PRESENTING EVIDENCE THAT COUNTERS SWORN AFFIDAVITS WHEN CLIENTS HAVE IT IN ABUNDANCE - JUST SAYIN'..
Our clients are often extremely vulnerable, having lived lives that were challenged by multiple obstacles.
SO LAWYERS FAILING TO REPRESENT THEIR CLIENTS ISN'T JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE OBSTACLES???
Many have made admirable attempts to parent their children. We need to be fearless in our advocacy for them. As a lawyer, I have experienced and seen derisive, sarcastic, or rude comments directed at myself and other lawyers who attempt to defend their clients. This needs to stop. It’s our client’s right – their children’s right – that they have a full defense.
http://www.tammylaw.ca/2018/02/27/report-of-the-motherisk-commission/
What is the definition of a modern inquisition?
The children's aid society is the only agency in Ontario or in Canada authorized to conduct investigations while not being required to be licensed to conduct those investigations or hire people qualified or licensed to conduct lawful investigations. (Imagine CSIS hiring social workers)
https://www.facebook.com/AnonymousCommunications/photos/a.450640935119567.1073741827.450638151786512/451572978359696/?type=3
Private Security & Investigative Services Ontario and the Children's Aid Society.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/derek-flegg/private-security-investigative-services-ontario-and-the-childrens-aid-society/915579271836937
A corrupt agency aided and abetted by a corrupt provincial court is a travesty of justice for Canadians an insult to the judicial system, to the constitution of Canada, and to life, liberty, and justice for all.
It results in tyranny, oppression, and absolute despotism of the people. There is no greater criminal than the criminal that sits on the bench robbing children of their FAMILY HERITAGE.
NOT EVEN CLOSE
In 2015 Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne proclaimed herself ready to do whatever it takes to fix the children's aid societies mess - except require the society to obey the social worker registration act or amalgamate the 47 CAS's, a key recommendation from the Jeffrey Baldwin inquest, or launch an investigation into the conduct of the frontline workers or the policies and practices of the management.
“If we could fix what is ailing the child protection system, child welfare system in this province, by starting from scratch and blowing up what exists — I would be willing to do that, because one child’s life would be worth changing the administrative structures.
But, just not yet. The premier wanted more evidence before she would act.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/12/22/premier-ponders-blowing-up-our-cas-mess-cohn.html
IF THE BEST PREDICTOR FOR FUTURE BEHAVIOR IS RELEVANT CURRENT BEHAVIOR THEN SHOULDN'T RELEVANT CURRENT BEHAVIOR BE THE BEST INDICATOR OF PAST BEHAVIOR DOUG FORD NOW OR NOT..
Discredited Motherisk hair-testing program harmed vulnerable families: report
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/07/31/news/doug-fords-tories-change-tune-and-cancel-financial-aid-program-low-income-people
https://niagaraatlarge.com/2018/08/01/fords-first-moves-hurt-ontarios-most-vulnerable/
https://niagaraatlarge.com/2018/06/04/22-billion-in-cuts-to-funding-for-public-services-planned-by-ontario-pc-leader-doug-ford/
http://www.ontariohealthcoalition.ca/index.php/release-doug-fords-first-cut-will-hurt-families-with-the-sickest-children-the-most/
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2018/08/05/social-assistance-cuts-likely-to-get-worse.html
COULD BASIC INCOME KEEP FAMILIES TOGETHER WHEN CHILD POACHING FUNDING PREDATORS COME A KNOCKIN'?
Minister MacLeod’s announcement to cut social assistance rates by 1.5 per cent will take approximately $150 million out of the hands of people who are among the most vulnerable in Ontario.
“People on social assistance continue to live well below the poverty line and would have used the additional much-needed money to pay for basic necessities,” says Jackie Esmonde, Staff Lawyer at the Income Security Advocacy Centre (ISAC).
Important reforms to meet the unique needs of Indigenous communities have also been put on hold. Ending these changes will have a very negative impact on people experiencing the deepest poverty in our province and demonstrates a profound disrespect for the needs of Indigenous people in Ontario.
Minister MacLeod also cut or cancelled other positive changes that were slated for this fall, including:
Reducing the amount of money that people on Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) can keep in their pockets while working.
Cuts to other allowances such as the guide dog benefit for people with vision impairments and the advanced age allowance for people who are older.
Cancellation of a change to the definition of “spouse” from three months co-habitation to three years.
Cancellation of full basic benefits to people who get housing and food from the same provider, including many people living with disabilities.
Cancellation of increased support to people living in Northern Ontario, where daily living costs are higher.
http://incomesecurity.org/policy-advocacy/ontarios-cuts-to-social-assistance-will-hurt-the-most-vulnerable/#.W2GzBNxXpj8.twitter
A backgrounder about the changes that have been cancelled is available here:
http://incomesecurity.org/public-education/important-changes-coming-to-ow-and-odsp-changements-importants-aux-programmes-dot-et-du-posph/.
Does Doug Ford's inquiry into liberal spending include the tens of billions of dollars the liberals justified giving to the CAS with a fraudulent drug test?
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/former-b-c-premier-will-lead-doug-fords-independent-inquiry-into-liberals-past-spending-in-ontario
What Is Ontario’s Basic Income Pilot Project?
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/07/30/what-is-ontario-s-basic-income-pilot-project_a_23492670/
PC government says Ontario’s basic income pilot project is ‘failing’
By Shawn Jeffords The Canadian Press.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4376849/basic-income-pilot-end-date-ontario/
PC's plan to scrap Ontario basic income pilot project called 'shameful' by NDP leader.
Planned 3% increase to welfare and disability support to be cut in half
CBC News · Posted: Jul 31, 2018 2:30 PM ET | Last Updated: July 31.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/lisa-macleod-announcement-1.4768626
Basic income advocates say pilot program was not 'failing'
City's director of Human Services says he saw no evidence the basic income program was 'failing' NEWS Aug 23, 2018 by Mary Riley.
https://www.mykawartha.com/news-story/8845108-basic-income-advocates-say-pilot-program-was-not-failing-/
Federal government urged to save Ontario’s basic-income pilot project
BILL CURRY AND RACHELLE YOUNGLAI
OTTAWA AND TORONTO PUBLISHED AUGUST 1, 2018.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-government-urged-to-save-ontarios-basic-income-pilot-project/
IF YOU TAKE 150 MILLION AWAY FROM THE POOR YOU'LL ONLY HAVE TO GIVE THE CAS ANOTHER 500 MILLION A YEAR TO "SAVE THE CHILDREN" FROM MALTREATMENT BY OMISSION..
COULD BASIC INCOME KEEP FAMILIES TOGETHER AND SAVE MORE MONEY THAN THE CAS SPENDS EVERY YEAR?
“Harmful Impacts” is the title of the commission report written by the Honourable Judith C. Beaman after two years of study. After reading it, “harmful” seems almost to be putting it lightly. The 56 cases the commission examined in which the flawed Motherisk tests, administered by SickKids Hospital between 2005 and 2015, were determined to have a “substantial impact” on the decisions of child protection agencies, led to children being permanently removed from their families.
The Motherisk report points to the larger problem that allowed the the CAS's use of the Motherisk lab to cause so much damage: the system unfairly targets poor families — especially, the report details, Indigenous and racialized families; the legal deck is stacked against those families, denying them due process to a staggering degree; and authorities are too quick to take children from their parents in the absence of evidence of severe abuse or neglect.
56 cases?
Out of the over 35 000 tests did any of tests result in a closed file or did they all result in ongoing funding for the CAS?
Removal from the home — permanent removal — is not supposed to be a move taken lightly. The report goes over the legal principles, laying out that it should be a last resort. It is the “capital punishment” of child protection, according to one citation, absolutely devastating to parents, and for children it is “often the beginning of a life sentence.”
Yet in the cases reviewed here, it is imposed, often apparently cavalierly and without even a trial, for reasons that amount to a punishment for being poor.
Rich parents who are alcoholics, after all, are not having their children taken from them after a single relapse. Few rich parents, in fact, are having their children taken from them at all.
Lives were ruined. Parents’ lives, and quite possibly children’s lives. Siblings and grandparents and other family members’ lives, too. Irreversibly ruined. And in many cases, it seems this was allowed to happen primarily because people were poor.
It is hard to think of anything more harmful than that.
The Motherisk lab was shut down in 2015 — too long after the problems with it were known, exposed in part due to the reporting of my Star colleague Rachel Mendleson, after far too much damage was done. But reading the report, it becomes clear that shutting down the lab solves only one small part of the problem. The entire system needs to be overhauled.
The problems detailed in the report’s 278 pages are too numerous to go into in detail. They document the many problems with the SickKids lab’s testing and with the child protection system’s overreliance on those results. The hair testing process produced inconsistent and untrustworthy results despite being perceived as carrying the unimpeachable weight of scientific authority. That much we pretty much knew because of earlier reporting, though the detailed breakdown of it and the specific case references make the injustice of it sickeningly vivid.
Chris Selley: Ontario's stolen children still getting a raw deal as province deals with Motherisk scandal.
UNACKNOWLEDGED BY ALL PARTIES..
There’s not much worse governments can do to people than take their children away, but the pure horror of it does not seem to have pervaded the public conscience.
Not one charity, church or person has come forward to offer any relief to the many victims traumatized by the treatment they received at the hands of their fellow Canadians citizens and no apologizes offered to anyone but gay couples waiting to adopt..
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-ontarios-stolen-children-still-getting-a-raw-deal-as-province-deals-with-motherisk-scandal
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-motherisk-is-the-ontario-liberals-unacknowledged-and-worst-scandal
Report shines light on poverty’s role on kids in CAS system.
The effect of provincial policies on struggling families was especially apparent in the late 1990s, when the Conservative government slashed welfare payments and social service funding while at the same time, it introduced in child protection the notion of maltreatment by “omission,” including not having enough food in the home and this after giving the society what amounted to an unlimited funding scheme. The conservatives also failed to enforce the social worker registration legislation, a trend that continued under the liberals. The number of children taken into care spiked.
“The ministry has been pretty clear with us that advocacy is not part of our mandate,” Goodman said speaking for the society. “It’s not like they’re asking for the (poverty) data. They’re not.” Goodman then when on to suggest the silence suited the government more than the silence suited the society's funding goals.
When Deborah Goodman, a professor at the University of Toronto’s faculty of social work and a senior official with the Ontario Children’s Aid Society of Toronto said, "these families struggle to put food on the table, they struggle to keep a roof over their heads and the reason children’s aid is in their lives is because they’re under a lot of stress that affects their parenting."
Does she really think using police to enforce warrant-less fishing trips, then threatening to apprehend children if parents don't sign consents forms, submit to various forms of testing and then dragging them through a secret court system that's been stacked against them for decades is helping children and families?
By SANDRO CONTENTA AND JIM RANKIN
Mon., Aug. 15, 2016.
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/08/15/report-shines-light-on-povertys-role-on-kids-in-cas-system.html
How do you feel about child protection social workers taking off their lanyards and putting on their union pins to fight against professional regulation?
Since it began operations in 2000, the OCSWSSW has worked steadily to address the issue of child protection workers. Unfortunately, many CASs have been circumventing professional regulation of their staff by requiring that staff have social work education yet discouraging those same staff from registering with the OCSWSSW.
NOT ALL SOCIAL WORKERS ARE CREATED EQUAL.
The new regulation was updated to only require Local Directors of Children’s Aid Societies to be registered with the College so it's up to all of us now to encourage the employees of the children's aid societies that enter family homes, schools and hospitals to be registered and their credentials checked before they are allowed to enter said places.
The majority of local directors, supervisors, child protection workers and adoption workers have social work or social service work education, yet fewer than 10% of the over 5000 employed by the CAS are registered with the OCSWSSW.
"From the right to know and the duty to inquire flows the obligation to act."
Ontarians have a right to assume that, when they receive services that are provided by someone who is required to have a social work degree (or a social service work diploma) — whether those services are direct (such as those provided by a child protection worker or adoption worker) or indirect (such as those provided by a local director or supervisor) — that person is registered with, and accountable to, the OCSWSSW.
The new regulation was updated to only require Local Directors of Children’s Aid Societies to be registered with the College so it's up to all of us now to encourage the employees of the children's aid societies that enter family homes, schools and hospitals to be registered and their credentials checked before they are allowed to enter said places.
The absence of a requirement for CAS child protection workers to be registered with the College: ignores the public protection mandate of the Social Work and Social Service Work Act, 1998 (SWSSWA); avoids the fact that social workers and social service workers are regulated professions in Ontario and ignores the College’s important role in protecting the Ontario public from harm caused by incompetent, unqualified or unfit practitioners; allows CAS staff to operate outside the system of public protection and oversight that the Government has established through professional regulation; and fails to provide the assurance to all Ontarians that they are receiving services from CAS staff who are registered with, and accountable to, the College.
The existing regulations made under the CFSA predated the regulation of social work and social service work in Ontario and therefore their focus on the credential was understandable.
However, today a credential focus is neither reasonable nor defensible. Social work and social service work are regulated professions in Ontario.
Updating the regulations under the new CYFSA provides an important opportunity for the Government to protect the Ontario public from incompetent, unqualified and unfit professionals and to prevent a serious risk of harm to children and youth, as well as their families.
As Minister Coteau said in second reading debate of Bill 89, "protecting and supporting children and youth is not just an obligation, it is our moral imperative, our duty and our privilege—each and every one of us in this Legislature, our privilege—in shaping the future of this province."
The ministry sidestepped a question emailed by the Toronto Star on whether it would impose the requirement to register their 5000 plus employees with the College of Social Work, stating instead that it is funding the authorization process and leaving the society to police themselves with secret internal processes.
If you have any practice questions or concerns related to the new CYFSA, please contact the Professional Practice Department at 416-972-9882 or 1-877-828-9380 or email practice@ocswssw.org.
Submission-re-Proposed-Regulations-under-the-CYFSA-January-25-2018. OCSWSSW May 1, 2018
https://www.ocswssw.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/OCSWSSW-Submission-re-Proposed-Regulations-under-the-CYFSA-January-25-2018.pdf
Discredited Motherisk hair-testing program harmed vulnerable families: report
An independent commission tasked with examining the Motherisk hair-testing program said Monday the child welfare system's reliance on the analysis was "manifestly unfair and harmful" even when it did not substantially affect the outcome of apprehension cases disregarding the fact Motherisk always played a substantial role in the decision not to close files.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/discredited-motherisk-hair-testing-program-harmed-vulnerable-families-report/article38111582/
FUNDING SHORTFALL OR MISAPPROPRIATED FUNDING ?
Either way, it was bad news for underprivileged Canadians in Ontario who are at the highest risk of unwarranted intervention by scheming child poaching CAS funding predators..
March 14, 2013
In leaked memo, Peel CAS staff asked to keep cases open to retain funding due to a $67 million dollar province wide funding shortfall . The memo was signed by seven senior managers, using their first names only. One had her full name listed. Hmmm, I wonder who could be evil enough to sign her full name???
March 15, 2013
Province in talks with Peel Children’s Aid Society over strategies to defraud the tax payers in leaked memo and Ontario's Liberal government agrees to pay for CAS advertising campaign to help the society meet their funding goals... Report any suspicion equals any excuse will do.
Though the CAS claimed the purpose of the memo wasn't to inflate numbers, between 2011 and 2013 the 46 (at the time) separate societies investigated a combined total of 42 000 families or about 14 000 investigations per year, in 2014 - after the Peel Memo Leak - and launching a new government funded advertising campaign and reopening 20 000 previously closed files the societies investigated a combined total of over 82 000 families to meet their funding goals in that one year as reported by the Toronto Star.
Mary Ballantyne, CEO of OACAS said there was more context going into the decision making process than met the eye..
SO, WHAT HAPPENS THE NEXT TIME THE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY COMES UP SHORT?
"No one should be surprised that agencies like CAS are taking extreme steps to ensure they meet their funding goals" said Carrie Lynn Poole-Cotnam, Chair of the CUPE Ontario Social Services sector.
Conservative children’s services critic Jane McKenna said the memo’s optics are “terrible” and “reflect poorly on not just the CAS but also Wynne and the Liberal government, which bears ultimate responsibility for child welfare in Ontario.” She then went on to say, “These are desperate people doing desperate things.”
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/03/14/in_leaked_memo_peel_cas_staff_asked_to_keep_cases_open_to_retain_funding.html
No comments:
Post a Comment