It was a good thing my wife kept an up-to-date and complete copy of all our children's medical and school records because after the CAS involved themselves - our family doctor denied us direct access to the children's information, information that did cast considerable doubt on the worker's sworn affidavit once we were able to present it to the judge though the doctor's office was more than happy to offer to forward it to the CAS directly bypassing us altogether and we had the feeling the school would have done the same to deny us the opportunity to defend our children. See details below:
:::
MOTHERISK RECOMMENDATIONS:
Accessibility of Legal Aid funds.
Legal Aid Ontario should in authorizing disbursements to parents’ counsel related to expert evidence, consider the complexity of child protection cases and the miscarriages of justice that have resulted from failing to vigorously challenge expert evidence; expand its Big Case Management program to child protection cases; and expand its Complex Case Rate policy to child protection counsel.
A Motherisk expert testified for the defence in a Colorado murder case. The judge mocked the lab’s processes. But the case remained virtually unknown in Ontario until now.
Colorado prosecutor Eva Wilson exposed flaws in Motherisk's testing methodology and analysis during a murder trial in 1993.
https://youtu.be/WIJqYz91ceU or https://vimeo.com/264424499
Follow the Toronto Star on social media:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/torontostar/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/TorontoStar
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thetorontos...
Full Story: projects.thestar.com/motherisk/part-2/
The Ministry of the Attorney General should ensure that the total funding available to Legal Aid Ontario is sufficient to enable the Recommendations in this Report to be implemented.
LEGAL AID FUNDING CUTS:
Legal Aid funding cut nearly 30% in Ontario budget.
Legal Aid Ontario got hit with a major cut in Thursday's budget as the provincial government pulled $133 million and said the organization could no longer use provincial funds for refugee and immigration cases.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ontario-legal-aid-funding-cut-1.5095058
https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/04/29/news/legal-aid-ontario-cuts-jobs-after-doug-ford-slashes-budget
Specialty legal clinic for child protection
Legal Aid Ontario should establish an independent specialty legal clinic focused on child protection that could accept “hard to serve” clients, provide research and mentoring for private practitioners, engage in advocacy, and bring test case litigation to protect and enhance the rights of parents in child protection proceedings.
Lake 88.1 “In Focus”interview with LAO’s Andreas Von Cramon and Nathalie Champagne: Date: April 8, 2014.
Description: Transcript of April 8th, 2014 “In Focus” interview by Bob Perreault from Lake 88.1 FM in Perth and Andreas Von Cramon, Supervisory Duty Counsel Criminal/Family Law and Nathalie Champagne, District Area Director, Ottawa Region.
Anderas von Cramon Supervisory Duty Counsel Family, Criminal Law in Brockville, Lanark, Leeds and Grenville and is married to the CAS in-house lawyer for FCSLLG, Karynn Von Cramon.
FCSLLG Manager of Legal Services Karynn Von Cramon
$112,779.01 ($158.34 per hour)
https://www.ontario.ca/page/public-sector-salary-disclosure-2017-organizations-no-salaries-disclose
Anderas von Cramon operates a free family law clinic for families dealing with the CAS out of the courthouse to provide advice to people and to help them to prepare for family law cases, or to try to resolve their family cases outside the court. (sign consent forms and service agreement)
Parents go in praying for competent representation and good advice and instead get someone willing to bill legal aid to guide the parents through the process of having all their rights, dignity and children stipped away from them. According to legal aid right now family lawyers willing to accept legal aid bill an average of $40 000 dollars per case for not filing documents or filing them after the court has already granted the society a supervision order.. Or the society requests the judge order the parents to sign consent or service agreements after the parents have refused to sign anything and the judges oblige the society by ordering the parents to just cooperate.
Anderas von Cramon also gives basic help drafting documents. Basic means what? It means no help swearing in and filing documents or serving the document before the deadline - which means he does less than nothing.
I'm willing to bet if we could check, nobody Anderas von Cramon has ever "helped" has ever had anything filed before or after the deadlines have passed unless it was to submit to FCSLLG..
https://www.legalaid.on.ca/en/news/newsarchive/downloads/2014-04-08_In%20Focus%20interview.pdf?t=1495843200036
Just by failing to file the required paperwork by the deadline before a first appearance in family court on a child protection matter will potentially earn a legal aid lawyer a minimum of $40 000 according to legal aid Ontario.
:::
Expert reports
The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rules to require that, where a party wishes to introduce medical or scientific test results in a proceeding, the results be accompanied by a report from an expert explaining the meaning of the test results and the underlying science behind the testing; and require the content of expert reports to include the requirements in Rule 52.2 of the Federal Courts Rules, and in addition, require these reports to include the known or possible impacts of gender, socioeconomic status, culture, race, and other factors in the testing or assessment of results, as well as an explanation of what steps, if any, the expert took to address these impacts.
:::
The Scientific Sounding Eligibility Spectrum:
The Ontario Child Welfare Eligibility Spectrum is a field-developed, eligibility tool for child welfare in Ontario. Promoting excellence in our provincial child protection services, the child welfare eligibility assessment instrument supports the Ontario network of Children’s Aid Societies, their associated communities and the children, youth and families they serve.
Field developed by who?
By a highly trained, highly educated registered trustworthy professionals with decades of experience or by high school graduates with a course in general social work and decades of experience?
The Eligibility Spectrum is a tool designed to assist Children’s Aid Society child protection staff in making consistent and accurate decisions about a child or family’s eligibility for service at the time a society becomes involved.
Child protection workers investigate physical, sexual and emotional abuse and neglect and determine if a society needs to become involved to protect children and youth from domestic violence; help children find adoptive families; provide family care for children; and support families and youth in conflict.
The revised Spectrum (2016) contains additional scales and items to assist decision making in areas resulting from changes in legislation, current research, practice and inquest recommendations from the Office of the Chief Coroner. The 2016 version is the result of a group of dedicated Children’s Aid Society (CAS) professionals who completed research and consulted with frontline staff and stakeholders throughout the province to ensure the revisions made reflect the interests and needs of the sector.
http://www.threemountains.ca/oacas
http://www.oacas.org/publications-and-newsroom/oacas-annual-reports/
http://www.oacas.org/publications-and-newsroom/professional-resources/eligibility-spectrum/
Difference Between Objective and Subjective .
2016 By Surbhi S.
Objective information is one that produces the complete truth, i.e. it presents a story from all the angles in a systematic way. It is a fact, which is provably true. On the contrary, subjective information is colored by the character of the person providing it. It is a great interpretation or analysis of the facts based on personal beliefs, opinion, perspective, feelings, etc.
Objective vs Subjective
There are a number of philosophical issues, relating to the questions of objectivity and subjectivity of a statement, judgement, information, point of view or anything else. A statement is said to be objective when it is based on facts, and it can be proved easily and is impossible to deny.
Although in the absence of facts on a matter, then the statement becomes subjective, as the speaker presents his/her opinion, which is always biased. Subjective perspective is based on personal feelings, likes, interest, dislikes, and the like. So, the actual difference between objective and subjective piece of information lies in the facts and opinion.
Definition of Objective
Objective refers to an unbiased and balanced statement that represents facts about something. The statement is not coloured by the past experiences, prejudices, perceptions, desires or knowledge of the speaker. Therefore, they are independent and external to the mind of the specific person.
As the information is entirely facts based, it can be is observable, quantifiable and provable. It can be counted, described and imitated. It presents complete truth and is free from individual influences, so it proves helpful in rational decision making.
Definition of Subjective
Subjective means those ideas or statements which are dominated by the personal feelings, opinion, preferences of the speaker. It is an interpretation of truth or reality, from the speaker’s angle, that informs and affects the judgement of people and is always biased. It can be a belief, opinion, rumour, assumption, suspicion, that is influenced by the speaker’s standpoint.
A subjective point of view is characterized by the past experiences, knowledge, perceptions, understanding and desires of the specific person. These statements are exclusively based on the ideas or opinion of the person making it, as there is no universal truth.
Key Differences Objective and Subjective
The fundamental differences between objective and subjective are discussed in the given below points:
A neutral statement, which is completely true and real, unbiased and balanced, is an objective one. Subjective means something which does not show the clear picture or it is just a person’s outlook or expression of opinion.
An objective statement is based on facts and observations. On the other hand, a subjective statement relies on assumptions, beliefs, opinions and influenced by emotions and personal feelings.
Objective information is provable, measurable and observable. In contrast, subjective information is relative to the subject, i.e. the person making it.
The objective statement can be checked and verified. Unlike subjective statement or a series of balanced opinions, so they can’t be checked and verified.
When a piece of information is objective, it remains same, irrespective of the person reporting it. Conversely, a subjective statement differs from individual to individual.
An objective statement is appropriate for decision making, which is not in the case of a subjective statement.
You can find the objective statement in hard science, textbooks and encyclopedias, but a subjective statement is used in blogs, biographies, and comments on social media.
:::
Ensuring the reliability of expert evidence
CASs offered Motherisk test results as expert evidence in the legal proceedings to determine whether children were in need of protection and if so, who should care for them. Child protection law has "special rules of evidence" that recognize the need to protect children and to make decisions about their care as quickly as possible based on little or no factual evidence at all of abuse or neglect.
However, the relaxed approach to admitting the test results in the cases we reviewed pushed these less rigorous standards of evidence beyond what could reasonably be considered necessary or fair.
I have recommended a number of amendments to the legislation and rules governing the use of expert evidence in child protection, as well as changes to strengthen the representation of parents. I have also recommended enhanced education for judges on their important role as gatekeepers for expert evidence in the child protection context.
A U.S. court laid out extensive problems with how hair-strand tests were being done at the Motherisk Drug Testing Lab at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto more than two decades before similar issues were uncovered in Canada.
A joint investigation by The Fifth Estate, CBC Radio's The Current and the Toronto Star uncovered a capital murder trial in Colorado in which Motherisk's tests were found to be "not competent evidence" and thrown out in 1993.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/motherisk-colorado-court-case-1.4364862
:::
Five things to know about Motherisk hair testing..
1. The tests were preliminary
The tests performed by Motherisk relied on the unconfirmed results of its enzyme-linked immuno-sorbent assay (ELISA) tests.
ELISA is often used as a screening tool before more in-depth tests are undertaken. It can be used in toxicology as a rapid presumptive screen for certain classes of drugs. It’s useful if you need to screen a large number of samples when the presumption that only a small percentage will test positive. But it’s not definitive and the results can be erroneously interpreted.
The Motherisk Lab did not follow-up its presumed positive ELISA results with follow-on in-depth tests. Therefore, the results simply could not be relied upon to provide the absolute certainty needed.
As Craig Chatterton, a forensic toxicologist and a proponent of hair sample testing, correctly explains in the CBC report on Motherisk, a preliminary test like ELISA can be spot on - but, tragically for the families implicated, it can be 100% incorrect, too.
Susan Lang’s report went on to say "No forensic toxicology laboratory in the world uses ELISA testing the way MTDL [Motherisk] did."
2. Motherisk had no written standard operating procedures
Having standard, professional operating procedures in place is one of the central pillars of any testing environment, not just hair sample testing.
In this regard, Motherisk failed egregiously. The Lang report found no evidence of any written standard operating procedures at Motherisk. This raises serious doubts about the reliability and, crucially, the standardisation of its testing procedures.
Both forensic and clinical laboratories should have standard operating procedures in place for each of the tests they perform. Motherisk had no clear, documented procedures which means the processes could have varied substantially in each individual case, calling into question, rightly, the integrity of the lab’s results.
3. No transparency
Motherisk’s next misstep was the lack of formal process and documentation meant that it was almost impossible for any third party to robustly assess its results.
When the entire process isn’t adequately captured, it becomes easy for the lab to skirt over anomalies and simplify conclusions.
At Cansford Labs, for instance, we share the evidence in full. This is an absolutely vital component when the test will be involved in a highly sensitive matter like child custody.
The fact that Motherisk offered no insight into how its results were arrived at beggars belief.
4. Inadequate training and oversight
The inadequacy and transparency issues within Motherisk seeped all the way into the employees at the lab.
From reading the Lang report, Motherisk scientists were operating without any forensic training or oversight. The ELISA tests were inadequate, but even if they weren’t, the individuals interpreting the results weren’t properly trained.
Nobody at Motherisk, including, rather incredibly, Dr. Koren himself, had the proper training.
The lack of training manifested in all manner of amateurish mistakes. Staff routinely failed to wash hair samples before analysis, for example. One mother tested positive for alcohol because her alcohol-laced hairspray had not been washed off the sample. With the right training and process, these issues could easily have been avoided.
5. A compromised chain of custody
In the CBC report into Motherisk, one mother recalls how her second test was conducted after she disputed the first test’s results: “With my second test, the hair was done in the social worker’s office with the scissors out of her desk, tape off her desk and cardboard from the trash.”
Her sample tested positive for crystal meth, but laughably when she next saw her “hair sample”, the hair that allegedly belonged to her was longer and a different colour.
It should go without saying, but any robust testing process requires professionalism throughout. It’s not just about testing the sample, but also about how the sample is collected and treated.
The chain of custody is of paramount importance. Trusted professionals need to be present at every stage of the process, guided by the lab that will do the testing, and the procedures need to be the same for every single case.
Motherisk was an aberration:
When things go as wrong as they did at Motherisk, it’s important not to stick our heads in the sand. Especially when it involves vulnerable individuals.
But Motherisk wasn't just an aberration IT WAS AN ABERRATION that SPECIFICALLY targeted impoverished families.
The science of hair sample testing remains a powerful tool when the analysis is done correctly, appropriately, with quality control and assurances and interpreted by qualified experts.
Indeed, it’s only right that for vulnerable individuals, that nothing but the best will do. A fact that Motherisk seemingly forgot.
https://blog.cansfordlabs.co.uk/the-drug-and-alcohol-testing-blog/5-reasons-why-the-motherisk-scandal-shouldnt-happen-again
http://projects.thestar.com/motherisk/part-2/
:::
Wrongfully Separating kids from parents a 'textbook strategy' of domestic abuse, experts say — and causes irreversible, lifelong damage.
“Being separated from parents or having inconsistent living conditions for long periods of time can create changes in thoughts and behavior patterns, and an increase in challenging behavior and stress-related physical symptoms,” such as sleep difficulty, nightmares, flashbacks, crying, and yelling says Amy van Schagen - California State University.
The Science Is Unequivocal: Separating Families Is Harmful to Children
In news stories and opinion pieces, psychological scientists are sharing evidence-based insight from decades of research demonstrating the harmful effects of separating parents and children.
In an op-ed in USA Today, Roberta Michnick Golinkoff (University of Delaware), Mary Dozier (University of Delaware), and Kathy Hirsh-Pasek (Temple University) write:
“Years of research are clear: Children need their parents to feel secure in the world, to explore and learn, and to grow strong emotionally.”
In a Washington Post op-ed, James Coan (University of Virginia) says:
“As a clinical psychologist and neuroscientist at the University of Virginia, I study how the brain transforms social connection into better mental and physical health. My research suggests that maintaining close ties to trusted loved ones is a vital buffer against the external stressors we all face. But not being an expert on how this affects children, I recently invited five internationally recognized developmental scientists to chat with me about the matter on a science podcast I host. As we discussed the border policy’s effect on the children ensnared by it, even I was surprised to learn just how damaging it is likely to be.”
Mia Smith-Bynum (University of Maryland) is quoted in The Cut:
“The science leads to the conclusion that the deprivation of caregiving produces a form of extreme suffering in children. Being separated from a parent isn’t just a trauma — it breaks the relationship that helps children cope with other traumas.
Forceful separation is particularly damaging, explains clinical psychologist Mia Smith-Bynum, a professor of family science at the University of Maryland, when parents feel there’s nothing in their power that can be done to get their child back.
For all the dislocation, strangeness and pain of being separated forcibly from parents, many children can and do recover, said Mary Dozier, a professor of child development at the University of Delaware. “Not all of them — some kids never recover,” Dr. Dozier said. “But I’ve been amazed at how well kids can do after institutionalization if they’re able to have responsive and nurturing care afterward.”
The effects of that harm may evolve over time, says Antonio Puente, a professor of psychology at the University of North Carolina, Wilmington who specializes in cultural neuropsychology. What may begin as acute emotional distress could reemerge later in life as PTSD, behavioral issues and other signs of lasting neuropsychological damage, he says.
“A parent is really in many ways an extension of the child’s biology as that child is developing,” Tottenham said. “That adult who’s routinely been there provides this enormous stress-buffering effect on a child’s brain at a time when we haven’t yet developed that for ourselves. They’re really one organism, in a way.” When the reliable buffering and guidance of a parent is suddenly withdrawn, the riot of learning that molds and shapes the brain can be short-circuited, she said.
In a story from the BBC, Jack Shonkoff (Harvard University) discusses evidence related to long-term impacts:
Jack P Shonkoff, director of the Harvard University Center on the Developing Child, says it is incorrect to assume that some of the youngest children removed from their parents’ care will be too young to remember and therefore relatively unharmed. “When that stress system stays activated for a significant period of time, it can have a wear and tear effect biologically.
:::
Disclosure
The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rules to require children’s aid societies to provide automatic, ongoing, thorough and timely disclosure to parents. (failing to provide disclosures and denying parents access to files created by the agency is kind of abusive to isn't it?)
Education for judges on gatekeeping role in child protection
The National Judicial Institute, the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario, and the Ontario Court of Justice should enhance their efforts to provide education programs and resources on expert evidence in child protection proceedings. Education should emphasize the skills judges need in order to perform their gatekeeper function in the unique context of child protection.
Former Privacy Commissioner Ann Cavoukian wrote:
“I am disheartened by the complete lack of action to ensure transparency and accountability by these organizations that received significant public funding. As part of the modernization of the Acts, I call on the government to finally address this glaring omission and ensure that Children’s Aid Societies are added to the list of institutions covered.”
The only oversight for the province’s children’s aid agencies comes from Ontario’s Ministry of Children and Youth Services.
"As the law stands now clients of the Ontario Children's Aid Society under Wynne's liberals are routinely denied a timely (often heavily censored) file disclosure before the court begins making decisions and the clients can not request files/disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act nor can censored information reviewed by the Privacy Commissioner of Ontario or the federal counterpart."
In her 2004 annual report, which was released on June 22, 2005, the Commissioner called for amendments that would bring virtually all organizations that are primarily funded by government dollars under FOI for the purposes of transparency and accountability: This would include the various children’s aid agencies in the Province of Ontario. Many parents and families complain about how difficult it is, if not impossible, to obtain information from children’s aid agencies. Many citizens complain that CAS agencies appear to operate under a veil of secrecy. Unlicensed and untrained CAS workers are making decisions which are literally destroying families, yet there is little or no accountability for their actions short of a lawsuit long after the damage has been done.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/beef-up-information-laws-ontario-privacy-czar-says/article1120573/
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/commissioner-cavoukian-calls-on-government-to-preserve-freedom-and-liberty-514463911.html
https://youtu.be/xi3GSzkJlAg
:::
Child Protection Services—Children’s Aid Societies
Note: Total expenditures reported by Children’s Aid Societies were less than total transfer payments to Societies identified in Figure 2 by about $14.5 million.
This is primarily because Ontario’s Societies collectively reported a surplus (profit) in 2014/15 that will be - contributed to their balanced budget fund for future expenses/lawsuits.
http://www.auditor.on.ca/en/reports_en/en15/3.02en15.pdf
:::
The Motherisk hair testing was imposed on vulnerable parents with little regard for due process or their rights to privacy and bodily integrity.
CASs and the courts often drew negative inferences about parents who did not go for testing or disputed the results.
CASs and the courts often used hair test results as a proxy for assessing parenting.
The use of testing generally reflected a narrow approach to substance use, focussed on abstinence.
Test results were often admitted into evidence without the usual checks and balances of the legal system and given excessive weight by CASs and the court.
https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/motherisk/
Requirements of a Principle of Fundamental Justice
It "must be a legal principle about which there is sufficient societal consensus that it is fundamental to the way in which the legal system should fairly operate, and it must be identified with sufficient precision to yield a manageable standard against which to measure deprivations of life, liberty, or security of the person."[3]
The principle is "informed in part by the rules of natural justice and the concept of procedural fairness"[4]
Procedural Requirements
The PFJ do not require that an accused be entitled to the most favourable procedures possible.[5]
Whether a particular procedure will conform to the PFJ is may require the judge "to balance the competing interests of the state and individual".[6] What is required will depend on the context.[7]
Established Principles of Fundamental Justice include:
Arbitrariness
Vagueness
Overbreadth
Right to Silence
Minimum Level of Mens Rea
Right to Full Answer and Defence
http://criminalnotebook.ca/index.php/Principles_of_Fundamental_Justice
:::
A Legal Aid Lawyer in Child Protection Proceeding - Compilation.
My wife's lawyer didn't feel our children's medical and school records that show happy healthy children were relevant in child protection proceedin and continue to referred to them as reference materials as he advised total cooperation and sign everything for a worker he knew and though well of personally...
https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesUnitedOntario/videos/845025535836491/
In the video linked below is Kim Morrow, the former director of service for FCSLLG and she says two things that really stand out and highlight a systemic issue in the CAS. The ethical integrity of the management is severely impaired..
https://www.facebook.com/Justice4USALLTODAY/videos/769340573165845/
One: Kim says she doesn't believe a sworn affidavit should be a verbatim accounting of facts but should embody the spirit and intention of what transpired.
Two: Kim claims taking my family to court and asking for a supervision order was just part of their investigative process.
FCSLLG's lawyer actually asked the judge to order us to sign seven or eight consent forms each after we allowed the workers to talk to our children and see our home. The judge then ordered my wife an I to cooperate with the society. We did in every way except we signed nothing..
FCSLLG was unable to demonstrate their concerns had any basis in reality and eventually asked for permission withdraw their application after not being able to use the court to force my wife an I to sign consent forms. For months workers called and dropped by using any number of excuses to do so - trying to get us to sign. One worker claimed we were violating a court order by not signing the numerous consent forms and our children would be removed.
One year later FCSLLG "referred" my family to the Kingston CAS who attempted to claim our children fat, depressed and suffering in school to such an extent that my daughter was unable to speak in direct contradiction to our children's entire medical and school records. Less than an hour in the family court and the judge ordered the Kingston CAS to repay our legal costs after Kingston's lawyer withdrew an application for a supervision order and a motion detailing their plans for our children's future.
MEET SUN WAI, ANOTHER UNREGISTERED ONTARIO CHILD PROTECTION SOCIAL WORKER
This isn't another video full of disgruntled parents, it's an educational video - we won.. We used our children's school and medical history to give the judge a reason to doubt the worker's sworn affidavit...
Sun Wai, a University of Guelph graduate that has a BA in criminal justice and public policy who went on to become an another UNREGISTERED child protection social worker for Family and Children's Services of Frontenac, Lennox and Addington in Ontario. Sun Wai failed to investigate objectively, took a biased position throughout, and failed to reassess and adjust her position as she had a statutory duty to do when faced with information that did not support her original position or her sworn affidavit. Listen as Sun Wai explains the children's aid society's anti-oppressive policy.
https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesUnitedOntario/videos/570836186459483/
:::
C.A.S. ATTITUDE: WIN CHILD WELFARE CASES AT ALL COSTS $$$.
(According to legal aid Ontario family lawyers bill legal aid an average of $40 000 for child protection proceedings.)
By Gene C. Colman of Gene C. Colman Family Law Centre posted in Child Welfare on Thursday, January 1, 2015.
It should not be a matter of "win" or "lose" when it comes to Ontario child welfare law yet it isn't actually about the actual condition of the child or the child's welfare. It's about accusations, Cosmo quiz style parental risk assessments and fake experts and every time the society decides your a risk they get paid.
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?
https://www.complexfamilylaw.com/blog/2015/01/cas-attitude-win-child-welfare-cases-at-all-costs.shtml
:::
2013: In leaked memo, Peel CAS staff asked to keep cases open to retain funding.
Gene Colman, a Toronto family lawyer who handles cases involving CAS, said his office has been puzzled by the substantial increase in people calling because of CAS intervention in their families.
“I thought, ‘What’s going on, why are we getting so many calls?’ I wonder if it’s related. I don’t know,” he said.
Between 2011 and 2013 the 46 separate societies opened a combined total of 42 000 files or about 14 000 files per year, in 2014 - after the Peel memo leak and after reopening 20 000 previously closed files the societies opened a combined total of over 82 000 files to meet their funding goals as reported by the Toronto Star.
Colman said while some allegations made to CAS are very serious, others can be anonymous calls like “Mr. and Mrs. Smith have a dirty home,” or “Mr. and Mrs. Smith’s children aren’t properly dressed.”
Duty to report: OACAS
“Reasonable grounds” refers to the information that an average person, using normal and honest judgment, would need in order to decide to report. This standard has been recognized by courts in Ontario as establishing a low threshold for reporting suspicions. (can there really be more than one threshold for reasonable grounds and still be reasonable?)
http://www.oacas.org/childrens-aid-child-protection/duty-to-report/
March is the end of the fiscal year for the agency and in the memo staff are instructed to complete as many investigations as possible (no fewer than 1,000), transfer as many cases as possible to “ongoing services,” (court) and not close any ongoing cases during March.
Back in 2013 the children's aid society claimed there was a province wide funding shortfall of $67 million dollars and decided the best way to deal with that was to act in bad faith and defraud the government out of the taxpayers money by adding as many cases to ongoing services as they could, up to 1000 if possible (per society?)
The internal memo, signed by seven senior service managers, instructs staff to complete as many investigations as possible (no fewer than 1,000), transfer as many cases as possible to “ongoing services,” and not close any ongoing cases before the end of the fiscal year, March 31.
The memo indicated that these "unethical strategies" were necessary to reduce the society’s current deficit and secure future funding from the province.
"No one should be surprised that agencies like Peel CAS are taking extreme steps to ensure they have the funding necessary to fulfill their legislated mandates to do whatever they claim is in the best interest of the child,” said Carrie Lynn Poole-Cotnam, 2013 Chair of the CUPE Ontario Social Services sector. "
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/03/14/in_leaked_memo_peel_cas_staff_asked_to_keep_cases_open_to_retain_funding.html
:::
Cornwall sex abuse victims given large settlements.
Although confidentiality agreements could mean taxpayers will never learn the true cost of the settlements, a former MPP predicts the payouts will total tens of millions of dollars.
"I would look at somewhere between $70-100 million," said Garry Guzzo, a former Conservative MPP who blew the whistle on the scandal and pushed for a public inquiry.
A lawyer representing dozens of the victims wouldn't reveal how much money was paid. However, he confirmed several settlements have been reached with the Catholic diocese, the Ontario government and other Catholic organizations.
There are also several cases in the works against the Children's Aid Society.
"There's no doubt in my mind that these victims deserve this money," said Guzzo.
"You know the confidentiality agreement - never going to trial, never allowing it to become public - there's an element of hush money."
Published Thursday, June 10, 2010.
https://ottawa.ctvnews.ca/cornwall-sex-abuse-victims-given-large-settlements-1.521190
:::
2014: Three former County foster children have reached out-of-court settlements with the Highland Shores Children’s Aid Society for damages stemming from sexual abuse sustained while they were in the society’s care.
An order dismissing further action against the child welfare agency has been approved by a judge at the Prince Edward County superior court where the lawsuit was filed in April 2013. Court staff confirmed only three of the five cases have been settled to date, leaving two outstanding plaintiffs.
https://www.intelligencer.ca/2014/10/21/three-cas-cases-settled/wcm/3fd07287-3f2a-1755-7386-1c8c2353c943
:::
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.
Here are 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.
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 defense 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 defence.
http://www.tammylaw.ca/…/report-of-the-motherisk-commission/
:::
CAS managers charged more than $106,000 in 'unreasonable’ expenses.
By SANDRO CONTENTA News Thu., Nov. 10, 2016
The CEO of the York Region Children's Aid Society, Colette Prevost, has spent 30 years working in the social services and mental health sectors. She worked at the Sudbury society from 2008 to early 2015 and managed $36.2 million in provincial funding in the 2014-15 fiscal year. (TORONTO STAR)
The audit of senior manager expenses describes accounting and spending problems throughout the Sudbury society.
We all want to believe that nonprofit corporations like the children's aid society are full of hard-working people committed to improving society. But even the most well-meaning nonprofits can get into financial hot water.
Unfortunately the temptation to cover up financial problems can be particularly seductive for nonprofit CAS managers who have spent money like politicians with an expense account credit cards and no spending oversight for decades.
From April 1, 2013 to March 31, 2015, the society was not addressing, or complying with, 21 mandatory provincial government directives that govern how records are kept, expenses are approved and contracts awarded.
Record keeping was so bad that auditors couldn’t rule on an additional $290,000 worth of expenses on corporate cards, partly because they could not figure out which senior manager charged them.
That suggests the problems could go deeper than those found in the $203,400 worth of expenses they were able to review.
The audit also found more than $240,000 worth of contracts awarded in ways that violated minimum procurement policies, including failure to seek multiple quotes.
In a statement, the Children’s Aid Society of the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin said it has launched an internal forensic audit to “identify all the expenses that can be recovered” from Prévost.
In response to a request for comment from The Star, Prévost, who has not seen the report, said,“I do not take this lightly. I worked very diligently for Sudbury CAS. Sudbury CAS and I agreed late last year to reimbursement of expenses that were viewed as potentially outside agency policy.”
The York society’s chair, Barb Gray, said in an email that Prévost “is on a personal leave of absence.”
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/11/10/cas-managers-charged-more-than-106000-in-unreasonable-expenses.html
:::
A review of spending at the London and Middlesex Children’s Aid Society, kept under wraps for months, revealed nearly two dozen executives made more than $100,000 and the agency shelled out thousands of dollars for taxis and iPads.
London’s child welfare agency squandered money on costly office renovations and highly paid, bloated management ranks, a just-released report by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services states.
The ministry put the Children’s Aid Society of London and Middlesex under review in late 2013 because the agency that cares for vulnerable children was running a deficit.
https://lfpress.com/2015/03/16/child-welfare-agency-found-to-have-wasted-money-on-office-renovations-consultants-and-bloated-management/wcm/e32079bc-4395-7c5e-70ec-378d688f0b6a
:::
Layoffs At Windsor-Essex Children’s Aid Society BY ADELLE LOISELLE SEPTEMBER 1, 2017
The Windsor-Essex Children’s Aid Society is laying off eight administrative support and preventative services workers.
Interim Executive Director Terry Johnson says the layoffs will not affect workers on the frontline and should not affect the quality of care received by children in their custody.
She says the problem is the budget. The province is reviewing the funding formula, so the agency does not know how much money it will get this year.
“We don’t know our budget for the year, and we’re five months into our year,” she says.
While the number of children in Children’s Aid custody has remained relatively consistent, Johnson says more kids require more complex care, and that is costly.
(The most expensive babysitters on earth...)
“On average that’s $310 a day, but when you bring some kids in it costs $500 to $1,000 a day,” says Johnson. “It has a huge impact on the budget.”
The average family of four on welfare might get a $1000 a month in Ontario.
The agency came up short $1.4-million, but thanks to surpluses in years past, it was able to whittle that down to $300,000 or $400,000. Children’s Aid is not allowed to carry over a deficit, so it has to find ways to mitigate the shortfall.
Once it hears back from the province, Johnson says it is possible those workers will be recalled.
Because of bumping rights in the workers’ collective agreement, the layoffs are not expected to take effect until mid-October at the earliest.
https://blackburnnews.com/windsor/windsor-news/2017/09/01/layoffs-windsor-essex-childrens-aid-society/ ---
::::
Children's Aid gets $4.3 million cash boost from province
The local Children's Aid Society is out of the red after the province agreed to "mitigate" the agency's $4.3 million deficit in time for its April 1 fiscal year start.
BEATRICE FANTONI, WINDSOR STAR Updated: March 28, 2013.
The local Children’s Aid Society is out of the red after the province agreed to give the agency an extra $4.3 million to erase its deficit and balances its books in time for its April 1 fiscal year start.
But whether that extra money will help reverse a decision to layoff 18 casual employees is hard to say, said Bill Bevan, director of the Windsor-Essex Children’s Aid Society.
“There won’t be any quick decisions in the next few weeks,” Bevan said on Monday, adding that the cash boost will help balance the 2012-2013 budget, but he has yet to get a clear picture of what the province will provide for the 2013-2014 budget, since it has introduced a new funding model.
Last week, the CAS announced it would layoff 18 casual case workers due to budgetary deficits.
“There may be a need for those staff down the road, but not immediately,” Bevan said on Monday. It all depends on the volume of work in the coming months as well as how WECAS manages to re-organize itself, he said, adding that the layoffs are not child protection workers or full-time staff.
The cutbacks are forced by a $70-million provincial funding shortfall across Ontario. WECAS not only had a $4.3 million deficit, it is also juggling $1.6 million in historic debt.
https://windsorstar.com/news/childrens-aid-gets-4-3-million-cash-boost-from-province ---
:::
“You know your system is based on the flimsiest of foundations when you have absolutely no standards on who can do this work,” adds Gharabaghi, director of Ryerson University’s school of child and youth care.
:::
Woman charged with sex assault of minors worked at male Highland Shores Children's Aid Society group-home at time of alleged offences.
February 1, 2019 7:16 pm By Alexandra Mazur Online Reporter Global News.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4916584/woman-charged-with-sex-assault-of-minors-worked-at-male-cas-group-home-at-time-of-alleged-offences/
Woman charged with sexual exploitation worked at Children’s Aid at time of alleged offences.
Belleville police say two male victims came forward claiming incidents of sexual assault with the accused, 48-year-old Sandra Forcier.
https://globalnews.ca/video/4917374/woman-charged-with-sexual-exploitation-worked-at-childrens-aid-at-time-of-alleged-offences
Youth worker charged with historical sex assault.
Police in Belleville, Ont., have charged a 48-year-old woman with five counts of sexual assault dating back to 2012-2013, when she was employed as a youth worker.
The woman is charged with two counts of sexual assault, two counts of sexual exploitation of a youth under 18 and one count of sexual interference.
The woman was employed by the Highland Shores Children's Aid Society (CAS) when the alleged assaults took place. Police said a lengthy investigation resulted in two victims being identified.
Highland Shores CAS executive director Tami Callahan said the accused was a supervisor at a residence for youth run by the society before leaving in December 2013.
Callahan said Belleville police have not been in touch with the CAS, and she didn't know whether the complainants were in the society's care at the time of the alleged assaults.
The accused also worked at Belleville and Quinte West Community Health Centre as a counsellor. The centre's executive director, Sheila Braidek, said the accused has been on leave for an extended period of time.
The centre would not provide any further information, citing privacy concerns.
The woman is due back in court in February after being released from custody with numerous conditions.
Anyone with more information should contact Belleville police at 613-966-0882 ext. 2328
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/youth-worker-sex-assault-belleville-1.5001086
:::
Children’s Aid executive facing 20 charges in child abuse case. By Alexandra Mazur and Mike Postovit Global News. 2018.
OPP has charged William Sweet, a resident of Picton, Ont., after allegations of wrongdoing during his work as the executive director of the Prince Edward County Children’s Aid Society between 2002 and 2010.
After investigating cases of children placed with foster parents who themselves were convicted of child abuse, this led the OPP to look into Sweet’s involvement as executive director of the child care organization.
The 67-year-old Picton resident was charged with 10 counts each of criminal negligence causing bodily harm and failure to provide the necessities of life. The accused appeared at the Ontario Court of Justice in Picton on May 2.
Sgt. Carolle Dionne, provincial media relations coordinator, says that although Sweet never fostered any children of his own, he is being charged because as she said, “he ought to have known better” than to place children with the foster parents who have since been convicted in child abuse cases.
For a period of eight years, nine foster children were placed with six foster parents who have since been convicted of sexual abuse against those children.
According to Dionne, Sweet’s investigation encompassed a review of those previous abuse investigations and convictions between 2013 and 2016. Police then conducted additional interviews, executed search warrants and seized evidence to put before the court for Sweet’s charges.
OPP officers are not commenting on specific details of the allegations as the matter is now before the courts.
Children’s Aid Society moves on
Mark Kartusch is the current executive director of the Highland Shores Children’s Aid Society. In 2012, after the Ministry of Children and Youth Services reviewed the Prince Edward County Children Services, Sweet left his post, and his branch dissolved. What came from that was an amalgamation of several children’s aid offices, an organization which Kartusch now heads.
He says that Sweet’s charges are bringing up bad memories, but that he hopes people will have faith in the workers.
“We didn’t have a lot of people coming forward to become foster parents,” said Kartusch, although he said that things have changed in the last few years.
He also emphasized that events like those that happened to the children placed out of the Prince Edward County children’s aid are highly unusual.
“Kids are safe in foster homes,” Kartusch emphasized.
He finished by saying that although there are employees from the now defunct Prince Edward Country chapter working within the Highland Shores organization, they were not involved in any criminal activity.
“The charges are isolated with Bill,” said Kartusch about Sweet.
https://globalnews.ca/news/4182170/childrens-aid-executive-charged/
:::
A 14-year-old girl is a ‘sexually mature young woman,’ not a child, children’s aid society lawyer argues in sex abuse suit.
Kenora-Rainy River Districts Child and Family Services tells the Star it disagrees with what its lawyer argued in an ongoing sexual abuse court case, but refused to say whether it plans to rectify the statement in court.
NEWS 01:49 PM by Jacques Gallant Toronto Star
A 14- or 15-year-old girl is not a child, but rather a "sexually mature young woman," according to a lawyer for a Northern Ontario children's aid society.
The statement by Toronto lawyer Gary McCallum is contained in a July 2018 affidavit in an ongoing civil court case, in which a woman is suing Kenora-Rainy River Districts Child and Family Services, claiming she was sexually abused as a child by her foster father in the 1980s while under the care of the agency's predecessor organization.
It was again referenced in a January 2019 ruling from the lengthy case, which is playing out in a Toronto court.
The statement has been described to the Star by other lawyers and a professor of social work as "offensive," "shocking," and "appalling" — doubly so because it was made by the lawyer for the very agency charged with protecting the most vulnerable children.
"This is outrageous," said Melissa Redmond, assistant professor of social work at Carleton University. "You represent the organization that is responsible for protecting children in this community, protecting children from exactly the sorts of horrific circumstances that this child found herself in."
Redmond, whose research interests include child protection policy, said she can't understand why there have not been consequences for the statement. "I don't understand how this is in the public record and (Kenora CFS) have not been seen to distance themselves as quickly as possible and to talk about how they value the children in the community and the children they have served in the past."
820 Lakeview Drive Kenora Ontario P9N 3P7 Canada Phone: 807-467-5437 Fax: 807-467-5539
Ontario's Child and Family Services Act, which governs children's aid societies, is also clear. "'Child' means a person under the age of eighteen years," it reads.
Kenora CFS refused to say when it became aware its lawyer had made the statement, but told the Star this week it disagrees with McCallum and called his position "inaccurate."
The agency also refused to say whether it plans to rectify the statement in court.
McCallum declined to comment to the Star, saying in an email that "I will not be making any statements on matters that are currently being litigated and I will not be making any statements inconsistent with those of my client."
The statement is part of a voluminous court record that stretches back years. It appears in a July 2018 affidavit in which McCallum states he is responding to the affidavit of the plaintiff's lawyer, Simona Jellinek, which McCallum said is "rife with errors, imprecisions, and misrepresentations." (Jellinek declined to comment to the Star.)
"She states that the alleged assaults took place while the plaintiff was 'in childhood,'" McCallum states before noting that the plaintiff's year of birth indicates she would have been about 14 or 15 in the early 1980s.
"A fourteen or fifteen (sic) girl is a sexually mature young woman, not a 'child,' as the term is conventionally understood," McCallum states.
The statement is again referenced in a January 2019 decision by Superior Court Justice Jessica Kimmel, who ruled that the plaintiff's action could proceed. In her decision, Kimmel makes no comment on the statement itself, other than to say it was identified as a "live" issue by McCallum surrounding the allegation of sexual assault.
As other lawyers have pointed out, McCallum's position — which has now been in the public record for about eight months since the affidavit was sworn in July 2018 — is effectively the agency's position, as he is acting for it in court.
"He's speaking on behalf of a children's aid society, so it's deeply concerning that there's a children's aid society out there that takes the view that youngsters of 14 or 15 are sexually mature," said lawyer Loretta Merritt, whose practice is almost exclusively focused on representing plaintiffs in civil cases involving sexual abuse.
"If that's their view, the view of an organization charged with responsibility for caring for vulnerable children, then that's deeply concerning to me."
Kenora CFS executive director Bill Leonard told the Star in an email exchange this week that he can't really comment as the court case is ongoing.
"Mr. McCallum's statement is before the court and as you point out, it has been before the court for some time," he said. "But to be clear my agency does, and always has, considered 14 and 15 year old young persons to be children as defined by legislation and as such are deserving of our full protection from any form of abuse."
It's "disappointing" if Kenora CFS didn't know at the time that their lawyer had made such a statement in court, said Allen Wynperle, president-elect of the Ontario Trial Lawyers Association, which represents lawyers acting for plaintiffs.
"I would have hoped that they would be aware of the comments that their lawyer is making, and certainly if they weren't, that's a problem and a concern," he said. "But certainly now that they are made aware of it, what are they going to do about it?"
Jacques Gallant is a Toronto-based reporter covering legal affairs. Follow him on Twitter: @JacquesGallant
https://www.thespec.com/news-story/9237081-a-14-year-old-girl-is-a-sexually-mature-young-woman-not-a-child-children-s-aid-society-lawyer-argues-in-sex-abuse-suit/
:::
:::
"Motherisk reforms show struggling families don’t need to be split up, they need our help."
Among the many dozens of pages of terrible stories and horrifying details contained in the Motherisk Commission report released this week, one case referred to in passing jumped out at me as exemplifying the problem.
“In one case, the society’s materials described a parent as having excellent parenting skills and reported that she consistently attended for access. Notwithstanding this encouraging evidence, when a positive Motherisk test appeared to show low levels of cocaine and marijuana, the court made the child a Crown ward, without access, after a summary judgment hearing.”
We now know that Motherisk testing was unreliable. A summary judgment means that the decision was made by a judge without a trial.
“Excellent parenting skills.” Yet she had her child taken away from her forever by one faulty test.
“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.
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.
“In many of the cases we reviewed, when a Motherisk hair test came back positive, CAS (Children’s Aid Society) workers focused solely on the apparent substance use instead of considering any actual effect on parenting,” Beaman writes. Use was considered proof of addiction, and addiction was considered proof of “an inability to parent.” That, sometimes in the absence of any other meaningful evidence at all, led to children being taken away from their parents.
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.
“The underlying issue in many child protection cases before the court is poverty,” the report says. Much of the time, Beaman writes she heard what families most needed was help with groceries or babysitting, counselling or mental health treatment, help providing safe shelter.
What these parents and children needed, in other words, was help.
Helping struggling families takes billions of dollars in resources families need, like 5160 unregistered workers and large costly office buildings obviously of which OACAS admits in their own report over 1500 of them are not qualified by College standards. And as we see all too clearly, they are the systematic ruination of thousands of people’s lives.
What they got instead was the irrevocable breakup of their families. The loss for life of any contact at all with those in the world they loved most, and those who loved them most. They got harm, permanent harm.
It is hard to think of anything worse than that.
By EDWARD KEENAN Star Columnist Fri., March 2, 2018.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/03/02/motherrisk-reforms-show-struggling-families-dont-need-to-be-split-up-they-need-our-help.html
Respecting The Canadian Constitution And Our Procedural Safeguards..
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.
There is a major power imbalance between an impoverished parent (we know that families of low socio-economic status are hugely over-represented in the child welfare system and race has little to do with it) and the state funded agency. To guard against such an imbalance, it is critical that our legal system respect the time-tested procedural safeguards developed to specifically ensure that the disadvantaged party is treated fairly.
Yet according to the Motherisk report, these safeguards were ignored. The report describes a litany of procedural injustices perpetrated on parents: parents were pressured to consent to testing; were not informed of their right to reject testing; they had adverse inferences drawn against them when they rejected testing; they were required to prove the unreliability of testing instead of the other way around; and they were refused the right to cross-examine Motherisk "experts" at summary judgment motions.
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.
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees procedural fairness when the state interferes with fundamental personal rights, such as the right by parents to care for their children. Ironically enough, the issue of taking body samples (such as hair for testing) without proper consent for the purpose of criminal investigations was found to be an infringement of the Charter 20 years ago by the Supreme Court.
The problems detailed in the Motherisk 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.
:::
Motherisk hair test evidence tossed out of Colorado court 2 decades before questions raised in Canada.
For more than two decades, Motherisk performed flawed hair-strand tests on thousands of vulnerable families across Canada, influencing decisions in child protection cases that separated parents from their children and sometimes children from their siblings. (CBC)
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/motherisk-colorado-court-case-1.4364862
A Motherisk expert testified for the defence in a Colorado murder case. The judge mocked the lab’s processes. But the case remained virtually unknown in Ontario until now.
http://projects.thestar.com/motherisk/part-2/
Judge rejects proposed class-action over Motherisk drug-testing scandal.
By RACHEL MENDLESON Investigative Reporter. Thu., Nov. 2, 2017.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/11/02/judge-rejects-proposed-class-action-over-motherisk-drug-testing-scandal.html
Parents lose second bid to launch class-action suit against Motherisk over flawed hair tests.
By RACHEL MENDLESON Investigative Reporter. Tues., Nov. 27, 2018.
Despite the “knee-jerk denials” of Motherisk experts and the Hospital for Sick Children, it wouldn’t be hard to prove in court that the lab’s drug and alcohol hair tests were broadly unreliable. However, establishing this fact wouldn't advance individual cases enough to make a national class-action lawsuit the right approach for thousands of families seeking compensation.
https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2018/11/27/parents-lose-second-bid-to-launch-class-action-suit-against-motherisk-over-flawed-hair-tests.html
:::
Standards of Care for the Administration of Psychotropic Medications to Children
and Youth Living in Licensed Residential Settings.
Summary of Recommendations of the Ontario Expert Panel February 2009.
http://www.children.gov.on.ca/htdocs/English/documents/specialneeds/residential/summary_report.pdf
The Public Health Agency of Canada in 2004 reported that many adolescents were taking Ritalin as a recreational drug to stay awake, to increase attentiveness, to suppress appetite and to get high.
Research out of Atlantic Canada found that about 8.5 per cent of children in Grades 7 to 12 had taken Ritalin for non-medicinal purposes, compared with 5.3 per cent who were prescribed it.
Unnati Gandhi
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/nearly-half-of-children-in-crown-care-are-medicated/article687480/
Use of 'behaviour-altering' drugs widespread in foster, group homes.
2014.. Almost half of children and youth in foster and group home care aged 5 to 17 — 48.6 percent — are on drugs, such as Ritalin, tranquilizers and anticonvulsants, according to a yearly survey conducted for the provincial government and the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies (OACAS). At ages 16 and 17, fully 57 per cent are on these medications.
In group homes, the figure is even higher — an average of 64 percent of children and youth are taking behaviour-altering drugs. For 10- to 15-year-olds, the number is a staggering 74 per cent.
“Why are these kids on medication? Because people are desperate to make them functional,” Baird says, and “there’s so little else to offer.
Yet if the parents take medication to help make them more "functional" it's a reason for to keep a file open or apprehend a child, not render assistance or relief.
The figures are found in “Looking After Children in Ontario,” a provincially mandated survey known as OnLAC. It collects data on the 7,000 children who have spent at least one year in care. After requests by the Star, the 2014 numbers were made public for the first time.
- The Star obtained the reports in a freedom of information request and compiled them according to the type of serious event that occurred — something the ministry does not do.
They note everything from medication errors to emotional meltdowns to deaths.
Restraints were used in more than one-third of 1,200 serious occurrence reports filed in 2013 by group homes and residential treatment centres in the city, according to a Star analysis.
At one treatment facility, 43 of the 119 serious occurrence reports filed to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services include a youth being physically restrained and injected by a registered nurse with a drug, presumably a sedative.
How is a society that's against spanking isn't against tying children to their beds and drugging them?
The language used by some group homes evokes an institutional setting rather than a nurturing environment. When children go missing, they are “AWOL.” In one instance in which a child acted out in front of peers, he was described as a “negative contagion.” Often, the reasons for behaviour are not noted. Children are in a “poor space” and are counselled not to make “poor choices.”
Blame is always placed on the child.
Their stories are briefly told in 1,200 Toronto reports describing “serious occurrences” filed to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services in 2013. Most involve children and youth in publicly funded, privately operated group homes.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/12/12/use_of_behaviouraltering_drugs_widespread_in_foster_group_homes.html
:::
What’s worse is that the number of children prescribed dangerous drugs is on the rise. Doctors seem to prescribe medication without being concerned with the side-effects.
Worldwide, 17 million children, some as young as five years old, are given a variety of different prescription drugs, including psychiatric drugs that are dangerous enough that regulatory agencies in Europe, Australia, and the US have issued warnings on the side effects that include suicidal thoughts and aggressive behavior.
According to Fight For Kids, an organization that “educates parents worldwide on the facts about today’s widespread practice of labeling children mentally ill and drugging them with heavy, mind-altering, psychiatric drugs,” says over 10 million children in the US are prescribed addictive stimulants, antidepressants and other psychotropic (mind-altering) drugs for alleged educational and behavioral problems.
In fact, according to Foundation for a Drug-Free World, every day, 2,500 youth (12 to 17) will abuse a prescription pain reliever for the first time (4). Even more frightening, prescription medications like depressants, opioids and antidepressants cause more overdose deaths (45 percent) than illicit drugs like cocaine, heroin, methamphetamines and amphetamines (39 percent) combined. Worldwide, prescription drugs are the 4th leading cause of death.
https://dailyhealthpost.com/common-prescription-drugs/
:::
Toronto group homes turning outbursts from kids into matters for police
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015/07/03/toronto-group-homes-turning-outbursts-from-kids-into-matters-for-police.html
:::
Physical restraint common in Toronto group homes and youth residences. By Laurie Monsebraaten Social justice reporter. Sandro Contenta News Fri., July 3, 2015.
Strange that an agency that is against any form of corporal punishment isn't against giving children to people that are so willing deny children their rights as they drug, restrain and label them "problem children."
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2015/07/03/physical-restraint-common-in-toronto-group-homes-and-youth-residences.html
:::
Why are children in CAS care described like criminals?
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/02/06/why-are-children-in-cas-care-described-like-criminals.html
:::
Ontario’s most vulnerable children kept in the shadows
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/12/12/ontarios_most_vulnerable_children_kept_in_the_shadows.html
:::
The inquest into Jeffrey Baldwin's death was supposed to shed light on the child welfare system and prevent more needless child deaths. Baldwin's inquest jury made 103 recommendations. Sep 06, 2013.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/inquest-into-boy-s-death-to-shed-light-on-child-welfare-system-1.1699846
Nearly six months after the inquest into the death of Katelynn Sampson began, jurors delivered another 173 recommendations. APRIL 29, 2016.
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/inquest-into-death-of-7-year-old-girl-emphasizes-duty-to-report-abuse/article29798749/
276 OFFICIAL REASONS FOR CONCERN ABOUT CHILDREN IN CARE.
The Star obtained the reports in a freedom of information request and compiled them according to the type of serious event that occurred — something the ministry does not do.
They note everything from medication errors to emotional meltdowns to deaths.
Restraints were used in more than one-third of 1,200 serious occurrence reports filed in 2013 by group homes and residential treatment centres in the city, according to a Star analysis.
At one treatment facility, 43 of the 119 serious occurrence reports filed to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services include a youth being physically restrained and injected by a registered nurse with a drug, presumably a sedative.
How is a society that's against spanking isn't against tying children to their beds and drugging them?
The language used by some group homes evokes an institutional setting rather than a nurturing environment. When children go missing, they are “AWOL.” In one instance in which a child acted out in front of peers, he was described as a “negative contagion.” Often, the reasons for behaviour are not noted. Children are in a “poor space” and are counselled not to make “poor choices.”
Blame is always placed on the child.
Their stories are briefly told in 1,200 Toronto reports describing “serious occurrences” filed to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services in 2013. Most involve children and youth in publicly funded, privately operated group homes.
:::
The Government of Ontario is proposing to radically change the scope of Crown liability in the Province. This change may have a serious impact on the ability of First Nations and First Nation organizations to hold Ontario liable for past wrongs.
The proposed Crown Liability and Proceedings Act proposes to do the following, among other things:
Extinguish any cause of action for any acts of a legislative nature;
Extinguish any cause of action for decisions of a regulatory nature (even if they are made negligently);
Extinguish any cause of action for policy decisions, including program funding and termination, and the supervision, oversight and control of programs;
Expand the immunity of the Crown for actions in tort; and
Require plaintiffs to seek leave of the Court when alleging bad faith or misfeasance.
The proposal is very new and OKT has not yet conducted a full analysis of the effects that this might have on section 35 rights and other rights and interests of First Nations.
However, we expect that it could have sweeping effects on Crown liability for institutional and regulatory failures with respect to First Nations, including in child protection and environmental regulation.
If your First Nation or First Nation organization is concerned about these changes, please contact us for more information.
WRITTEN BY KEVIN HILLE
khille@oktlaw.com
