ONTARIO FOSTER CARE CRIMES.
2012: When Robert Horsburgh confessed to having sex with his foster daughter more than 30 years ago, then-Dufferin Children’s Aid Society (CAS) executive director Gary Putman saw no reason to inform police.
In those days, reporting illicit sex wasn’t something CAS workers did, Putman told The Banner.
“I have no regrets in what I did. I did exactly what would have been expected in that time, given that situation,” Putman said.
(and isn't that the problem and always been the problem [and how very catholic of him] some things are always wrong despite what decade it is)
Although Horsburgh, who grew up in foster homes, had committed illicit sexual intercourse with a foster daughter — a criminal offence that was repealed in 1988 — Putman said CAS had yet to establish protocols to work jointly with police.
https://www.orangeville.com/news-story/1481994--no-regrets-for-not-reporting-sex-with-foster-child/
:::
2013: She thought she was finally home.
Shunted about in the care of the Catholic Children’s Aid Society from the time she was six years old, bounced around more than 22 different foster homes in the previous two years alone, the young teen was relieved when they placed her in the Scarborough home of Howard Smith and his family.
He was a rising star at the TTC, she was given her own room in their four-bedroom house and was initially treated as well as the couple’s two children. She thought she was safe at last.
But in reality, the 14-year-old had been placed in a hornet’s nest. And by the time the CCAS finally heeded her pleas and rescued her, she was 15 and pregnant with Smith’s child.
Now 35 years later, Smith, the retired TTC general superintendent for surface routes, has pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a girl between 14 and 16 and having illicit sexual intercourse with a foster daughter between April 26, 1978, and July 13, 1978.
In the downtown courtroom, his victim sat huddled in the corner of the first row, her frail body bent in on itself as she shook with sobs. She has lost so much to this man and finally, after so long, he was admitting to what he did to her.
But not to everything.
Smith, 61, was also charged with rape, but that count on the indictment is to be withdrawn at his sentencing as part of the plea agreement, though Crown attorney Jonathan Smith hastened to clarify outside the courtroom that “there’s no suggestion that it was consensual.”
And still, she wanted that rape conviction most of all.
“But it doesn’t matter what I think,” she said bitterly when she learned the plea bargain would stand despite her objection. “What matters to them is getting it done and over with.”
If she feels let down, it is nothing new.
At 49, she has been on disability for the last decade with post-traumatic stress disorder and other ailments she traces back to a foster father stealing her virginity while she was in his care. “Everyone thinks he’s a pillar of the community. Everyone looks at him and sees Mr. Wonderful,” she explained in an interview. “I’m the one who sees the wolf in sheep’s clothing. He’s what my nightmares are made of.”
The assaults began after he was injured in a car accident and they were home alone together. “I couldn’t move, I was frozen,” she wept as she recalled the sexual assaults.
Her CCAS worker ignored her pleas to be moved. “Nobody would believe me over Mr. TTC inspector at the time,” she recalled. “They told me it was either there or the street.”
That quickly changed when they discovered she was pregnant. The CCAS yanked her out of Smith’s house and placed her in a home for unwed mothers. Court heard that the shameful child welfare agency never reported Smith to the police.
They failed her at every turn. She says her social worker even warned her that if she listed Smith as the father on the baby’s birth certificate, they’d ensure her daughter was given to him. Terrified, she agreed to list paternity as “unknown” because no one was going to take away her baby.
“I raised the child of a man I absolutely despised. But she was my lifeline. I got to love someone who loved me back. Without her, I wouldn’t have seen my 16th birthday.”
If they hadn’t done enough, she says a CCAS supervisor laughed at her in 1998 and told her she couldn’t bring charges against Smith because there was a statute of limitations. It was only while talking to a lawyer friend three years ago that she learned there is no such thing.
So in April 2010, she went to the police and DNA tests confirmed the horrible story that for so long no one would believe — that Smith got her pregnant when she was his 15-year-old foster child.
She has never been the same since.
“For two years I used to take two showers a day with bleach, I couldn’t get him off me,” she wept. “I was just a 14-year-old kid and he took my entire life.”
Smith is to be sentenced March 7.
https://torontosun.com/2013/01/29/catholic-childrens-aid-society-failed-teen-impregnated-by-foster-dad/wcm/934e92f3-a164-45dc-b3d1-85e9a660ab32
:::
2017: While the civil suit has been "dragging on forever," the lawyer says a trial date is now set for roughly a year from now, on May 7, 2018.
It would be unusual for it to reach that stage, however, as most cases of this nature are settled out of court WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY...
"If it goes to trial I think this will be the first case against a CAS in Ontario," Merritt says. "I am not aware of any other civil cases against Ontario CASs that have gone to trial."
Carl Chadbourne, the foster home operator who abused Vincent, was convicted in the early 1990s on multiple counts of sex assault — involving Vincent and other boys in his care — and sentenced to an 18-year jail term.
- It wasn’t until he had his own child, relatively late in life, that Keith Vincent realized what had been lacking so much in his own youth — and, indeed, most of his adulthood.
Merritt has represented many sexual abuse victims in her practice, but says this case is unique in the degree of the abuse.
"Keith’s is one of the worst cases I’ve been involved with," she says, noting the criminal sentence for Chadbourne speaks to that. "It’s rare to see a term of 18 years, and the sentences often don’t reflect the severity of the impact."
The case is also somewhat unusual in being "really founded in negligence by the CAS," she adds.
While the civil suit has been "dragging on forever," the lawyer says a trial date is now set for roughly a year from now, on May 7, 2018.
It would be unusual for it to reach that stage, however, as most cases of this nature are settled out of court WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY...
"If it goes to trial I think this will be the first case against a CAS in Ontario," Merritt says. "I am not aware of any other civil cases against Ontario CASs that have gone to trial."
jmoodie@postmedia.com
TRENDING IN CANADA
https://www.thesudburystar.com/2017/05/20/a-sudbury-boys-stolen-childhood/wcm/91375975-998c-50f6-1641-60a9cd66ae30
:::
2014: Three CAS cases settled.
Two of the former foster parents initially targeted in the claim were Walter Joseph Holm, 46, and his wife, Janet Holm, 49.
They pleaded guilty to several charges, including possession of child pornography, sexual assault and invitation to sexual touching and were sentenced in November 2011 to four- and three-year prison terms respectively.
Three of the five plaintiffs, now ages 21, 23, and 19, are linked to the Holms. It’s not known if they were the three of five now concluded.
Justice Geoff Griffin blasted the Holms for turning their home into a “sexual cult” while fostering 25 teenagers over the course of nine years.
The three plaintiffs further implied that PECCAS was “vicariously liable for the actions” of the Holms.
https://www.intelligencer.ca/2014/10/21/three-cas-cases-settled/wcm/3fd07287-3f2a-1755-7386-1c8c2353c943
:::
2016: Longtime foster parent arrested for alleged sexual assault in 1987.
Man arrested in historic Sexual Assault investigation, Bernard "Bernie" Desroches, 76, charged with Sexual Assault, Police believe there may be other victims.
“According to the Catholic Register, Desroches and his wife, Nellie, have cared for over 1,000 foster children in their home over a 35-year period. The couple had focused on babies, “many of them medically fragile or abused.”
https://toronto.citynews.ca/2016/01/19/longtime-foster-parent-arrested-for-alleged-sexual-assault-in-1987/
:::
The Toronto Police Service would like to advise the public of an arrest in a historical Sexual Assault investigation.
On October, 6, 2015, officers began an investigation into an alleged sexual assault between January 20, 1987 and March 27, 1987.
On Monday, January 18, 2016, Bernard "Bernie" Desroches, 76, of Toronto, was arrested. He is charged with:
1) Sexual Assault
He will appear in court at 1911 Eglinton Avenue East on Monday, February 29, 2016, 2 p.m., room 407.
He is described as white, 6’0”-6’3”.
Police believe there may be other victims.
Anyone with information is asked to contact police at 416-808-4200, Crime Stoppers anonymously at 416-222-TIPS (8477), online at www.222tips.com, text TOR and your message to CRIMES (274637). Download the free Crime Stoppers Mobile App on iTunes, Google Play or Blackberry App World.
A sexual assault is any form of unwanted sexual contact. It includes, but is not limited to, kissing, grabbing, oral sex and penetration. To learn more about sexual assault, including how to report a sexual assault, please visit our Sex Crimes website.
Please download the Toronto Police Service Mobile App for iOS or Android. http://torontopolice.on.ca/newsreleases/33763
Broadcast time: 09:57
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
42 Division
416-808-4200
Case #: 2015-1733128
https://www.facebook.com/1800222TIPS/posts/man-arrested-in-historic-sexual-assault-investigation-bernard-bernie-desroches-7/10153862495417629/
:::
A woman came forward with an allegation of sexual impropriety on Oct. 6, 2015, prompting an historical sex assault investigation, Toronto Police Const. David Hopkinson said Tuesday.
And no further details of the alleged sexual assault have been revealed.
Investigators have released a photo of the accused out of concern there may be other victims, Hopkinson said.
https://torontosun.com/2016/01/19/arrest-made-in-1987-sex-assault/wcm/6a703759-46c0-466f-8a94-3043b6867b32
https://www.durhamradionews.com/archives/86759
How Could You? Hall of Shame-Canada-Bernard “Bernie” Desroches
By Rally on 1-30-2016 in Abuse in foster care, Bernard Desroches, Canada, How could you? Hall of Shame
“A 76-year-old man has been arrested and charged in an investigation of an alleged sexual assault that occurred between Jan. 20 and Mar. 27, 1987.”
“According to the Catholic Register, Desroches and his wife, Nellie, have cared for over 1,000 foster children in their home over a 35-year period. The couple had focused on babies, “many of them medically fragile or abused.”
The couple started fostering children in the mid-1970s.
According to the Register, Desroches was a pharmacist before retiring.
Police believe there may be other victims. Anyone with information is asked to call police at 416-808-4200 or Crime Stoppers at 416-222-TIPS.”
Longtime foster parent arrested for alleged sexual assault in 1987 [680 News 1/19/16 ]
http://www.reformtalk.net/2016/01/30/how-could-you-hall-of-shame-canada-bernard-bernie-desroches/
:::
2018: GREY HIGHLANDS — Provincial police say a central Ontario man who used to be a foster parent has been charged with multiple sex offences.
Police say they began their investigation on Aug. 14 after allegations were reported to officers.
They say they arrested a 69-year-old man from Grey Highlands last week.
He is charged with five counts of sexual assault on a person under 16, four counts of sexual interference, six counts of indecent exposure to a person under 16 and one count of sexual exploitation.
OPP say the man was a foster parent in Caledon, about 60 kilometres northwest of Toronto, before moving to Grey Highlands.
https://torontosun.com/news/crime/former-foster-parent-from-central-ontario-charged-with-multiple-sex-offences
:::
Teen ‘sexual cult’ in Ontario foster home known to Children’s Aid Society, victim says
https://globalnews.ca/news/5360057/teen-sexual-cult-ontario-foster-home-childrens-aid-society/
:::
2019: Dunnville foster parent charged with sex offences
Ontario Provincial Police have laid charges against a foster parent in Dunnville after a sexual assault investigation involving a person under the age of 16.
Haldimand OPP began their investigation Nov. 18 after receiving information about the allegation involving the minor.
As a result, the foster parent, a 59-year-old man, has been charged with sexual assault on a person under 16 years of age, sexual interference and invitation to sexual touching under 16 years of age.
https://torontosun.com/news/crime/former-foster-parent-from-central-ontario-charged-with-multiple-sex-offences
:::
2009: "Evil Edith" Sanders and her house of horrors are dead and gone, but the police and social workers who ignored allegations of child abuse in her home have finally paid a price for their neglect.
On the eve of a trial into horrendous abuse suffered by children at Ms. Sanders's London, Ont., home over a period of four decades, the agencies targeted in a negligence lawsuit have agreed to pay a substantial settlement.
In return, the three plaintiffs - elderly women who were part of an endless line of children that Ms. Sanders systematically abused, tortured and pimped out - have ended their lawsuit against the London Police Service and the Children's Aid Society of London and Middlesex.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/suit-settled-in-horrific-case-of-child-abuse/article4290587/
:::
2018: Christian couple that lost foster children for refusing to lie about Easter Bunny vindicated by Ontario court.
Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton put promoting the Easter Bunny ahead of preventing possible trauma to children when it removed the girls with only one day’s notice, a judge found.
An Ontario child welfare agency placed promoting belief in the Easter Bunny above preventing possible trauma when it removed two girls from a foster home because the Christian couple refused to lie about the bunny’s existence, an Ontario judge ruled.
In a stinging indictment of the actions of the Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton, a court judgment declared the CAS violated the foster parent’s right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression when the children were taken from their home and their fostering agreement terminated over the Easter Bunny dilemma.
Justice Andrew Goodman of Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice did just that in his 62-page judgment released Tuesday.
If foster parents rights can be violated by the CAS what about the tens of thousands of birth parents whose rights were violated over decades?
STORY CONTINUES
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/requirement-to-say-easter-bunny-is-real-violated-couples-charter-rights-court
https://nationalpost.com/news/religion/christian-couple-says-child-welfare-removed-foster-children-because-they-refused-to-say-easter-bunny-is-real
:::
Barbara Kay: "Children's aid societies gone rogue."
Story 1 of 3.
2014: The story began in 2010 when the London-Middlesex CAS applied for a court order to protect three boys, aged 15, 12 and 5, after a parental separation (the family name cannot be divulged). The mother had made multiple accusations demonizing the father: that he emotionally abused her; that he was a sexual abuser; and that he was a murderer who used the oldest boy “as a gun in his hands to try to kill the mother of these three children,” in words from Judge John Harper’s decision.
Finally the mother accused her oldest son of trying to kill her, which brought the family into criminal court. Yet after a preliminary hearing, and ever-shifting testimony from the mother, the Crown reduced the charge to “excessive self-defence.”
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, emails 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.
Judge Harper assigned two-thirds of the court costs to the CAS — a record $1.4 million — and $604,500 to the mother. If the CAS wasn't on trial why did the judge order them to pay court costs? Well....
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 in a criminal court that mandatory document-sharing (file disclosure) was running a year late in the family court, and that one CAS supervisor, tasked with providing information to lawyers, had removed 475 pages of notes, records, summaries and emails from the file to the criminal proceedings. (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 demonized father.
https://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
CONSIDERING THE CAS CLAIM JUDGES PROVIDE IMPORTANT OVERSIGHT OF THE CHILD PROTECTION SYSTEM HOW DID ALL THIS GET BY A JUDGE THE FIRST TIME IN THE FAMILY COURTS?
:::
Motherisk Is A Symptom Of A Larger Problem In Child Protection Work.
Family Law Information Centre (FLIC)
Meet child poaching funding predator Karynn Von Cramon, Manager of Legal Services for FCSLLG who is married to Perth's legal aid lawyer Andreas Von Cramon who runs a legal clinic (FLIC) giving free advice to families dealing with the CAS.
Legal Aid Ontario: Lake 88.1 “In Focus”interview with LAO’s Andreas Von Cramon and Nathalie Champagne 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 Date: April 8, 2014.
https://www.legalaid.on.ca/en/news/newsarchive/downloads/2014-04-08_In%20Focus%20interview.pdf
Supervisory duty counsel Andreas Von Cramon who practices in both Criminal and Family Law, has seen a trend lately wherein low income residents of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville are representing themselves in the court system rather than seeking advice through the Family Law Information Centre.
COULD IT BE BECAUSE HE DOESN'T GIVE GOOD ADVICE?
The reason may be that people are not aware of the services that are provided. His concern is that these services and resources can be of assistance to those going through trying times. - Doreen Barnes
https://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/4495905-family-law-services-expanded-in-tri-county-area/
::::
New expanded hours for family law services in Lanark, Leeds & Grenville legal clinic in Perth. Posted: Friday, March 28, 2014
Legal Aid Ontario (LAO) is helping the Lanark, Leeds & Grenville legal clinic provide more hours of support for financially eligible families, beginning April 1. This support will supplement the services already provided for families at the Family Law Information Centre (FLIC) in the Perth courthouse.
The expanded services for families at the clinic will include document preparation, assistance in applying for legal aid in addition to the legal advice offered at the FLIC. Independent legal advice is also available for clients who are using mediation to solve their family law matters.
Services at the clinic are by appointment only. To arrange an appointment, clients must first meet with the advice lawyer at the Perth FLIC to confirm that they require legal services and that they qualify for legal aid. LAO will be reviewing this initiative over the next six months and welcomes feedback from local community partners and stakeholders.
The expansion of family law services in Perth is one of a number of family law projects that LAO is undertaking, thanks to $30 million over four years in additional funding from the provincial government. LAO is investing the majority of this funding into sustainable improvements to family law programs and services.
Location:
Lanark, Leeds & Grenville Legal Clinic
10 Sunset Boulevard, Perth, Ontario, K7H 2Y2
Times:
Every second Tuesday, from April 1
9 to 11 a.m. by appointment only
Appointments can be arranged with the advice lawyer at the Family Law Information Centre at the Perth courthouse
Thursdays, 1:30 to 4:30 p.m.
Questions
For questions or further information, please contact:
Feroneh Neil
Manager, Communications
Phone: 416-979-2352, ext.5103
Email: neilfer@lao.on.ca and/or media@lao.on.ca
https://www.legalaid.on.ca/en/news/newsarchive/1403-28_lanarkleedsgrenville.asp
:::
C.A.S. ATTITUDE: WIN CHILD WELFARE CASES AT ALL COSTS $$$.
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). (Playing dumb) Why was I so shocked?
https://www.complexfamilylaw.com/blog/2015/01/cas-attitude-win-child-welfare-cases-at-all-costs.shtml
:::
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.
:::
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.
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/
:::
FLIC services are available in family courts across Ontario. At the FLIC you can find information about separation and divorce and related family law issues, family justice services, alternative forms of dispute resolution, local community resources and court processes.
Information and Referral Coordinators (IRCs) are available at designated times to help you understand your needs and to make referrals to appropriate services. IRCs can give you information about family mediation and other ways to solve your issues without going to court.
See the listing of FLIC offices throughout Ontario.
Family Law Information Centres
Family Mediation Services
Mandatory Information Program (MIP)
https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/family/infoctr.php
:::
Motherisk.
http://motheriskcommission.ca/wp-content/uploads/Report-of-the-Motherisk-Commission.pdf
https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/motherisk/
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/02/26/motherisk-tests-unfair-and-harmful-to-families-in-child-protection-cases.html
https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/motherrisk-commission-1.4552160
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
https://www.cbc.ca/fifth/episodes/2017-2018/motherisk-tainted-tests-broken-families
https://torontosun.com/news/local-news/mandel-victims-of-bad-science-at-motherrisk
https://futurecontent.co/5-reasons-motherisk-scandal-shouldnt-happen/
https://blog.cansfordlabs.co.uk/5-reasons-why-the-motherisk-scandal-shouldnt-happen-again
:::
Motherisk Report: 13 OF 32 recommendations - or 32 reasons children end up in care?
Summary of Recommendations: Accessibility of Legal Aid funds
8. Legal Aid Ontario should a. in authorizing disbursements to parents’ counsel related to expert evidence, consider the complexity of child protection cases and the miscarriages of justice that could result from failing to vigorously challenge expert evidence;
(IS THAT WHY FAMILY LAWYERS DON'T ASK TO SEE THEIR COURT DISCLOSURES BEFORE OF THE FAMILY COURT START MAKING LIFE ALTERING DECISIONS ON A PRIMA FACIE BASIS?)
b. expand its Big Case Management program to child protection cases; and
c. expand its Complex Case Rate policy to child protection counsel.
9. 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.
Specialty legal clinic for child protection
(SEE FLIC LEGAL CLINIC ABOVE)
10. 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.
Disclosure
11. 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. Education for judges on gatekeeping role in 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 counter-part."
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 AFTER THE DAMAGE TO THE CHILD AND FAMILY HAS BEEN DONE.
“Hundreds of organizations that are recipients of large transfer payments from the government are not subject to the provincial or municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Acts,” said the Commissioner, “which means they are not subject to public scrutiny.” Among the examples she cites are hospitals and Children’s Aid Societies. “Openness and transparency of all publicly funded bodies is essential – they should be publicly accountable.”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/beef-up-information-laws-ontario-privacy-czar-says/article1120573/
http://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/commissioner-cavoukian-calls-on-government-to-preserve-freedom-and-liberty-514463911.html
12. 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.
Extension of Counselling Services
1. The Ministry of Children and Youth Services should make free counselling services available to all affected persons,10 whether children, youth, or adults, upon request, for three more years from the date the Commission ceased to offer services (January 15, 2018).
Ensuring the Reliability of Expert Evidence
Bodily samples
2. The Ministry of Children and Youth Services should direct children’s aid societies to ensure that all child protection workers meet the requirements for obtaining valid written consent, in accordance with s 4(2) of the Child and Family Services Act (s 21(2) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act), in every situation where a parent is asked to provide a bodily sample.
The directive should require workers to document (why not video record?) the steps they took to obtain consent and should require workers to obtain confirmation signed by the parent acknowledging that the requirements for valid consent were met.
(SO DOES THIS MEAN THE UNREGISTERED UNQUALIFIED SOCIAL WORKERS WILL HAVE TO DOCUMENT THREATENING TO REMOVE CHILDREN FOR A LACK OF COOPERATION SIGNING EVERYTHING A WORKER WANTS PARENTS TO JUST SIGN?)
3. The Ontario government should amend the Child, Youth and Family Services Act to a. require courts to exclude evidence of tests of parents’ bodily samples unless the court is satisfied that the parent provided valid consent, or that the sample was obtained by order under the Act. The only exception should be situations where the introduction of the evidence is critical to protecting a child’s immediate safety. The provision should require the court to consider the parent’s right to privacy and security of the person before making this exception;
b. prohibit courts from admitting evidence of a person’s failure or refusal to voluntarily provide a bodily sample for testing where the evidence is being introduced in order to demonstrate that the person is less worthy of belief, is or has been engaging in substance use, or is being uncooperative; and
c. provide specific criteria for judicial orders that require a person to provide a bodily sample, with those criteria relating to the safety of a child.
10 We considered “affected persons” broadly to include the following:
• Children whose families were involved with CASs in part because of concerns arising from positive Motherisk hair testing, as well as their siblings, biological parents, adoptive parents, and foster parents;
• Family members, such as grandparents, aunts and uncles;
• Any other person who offered a plan for the children;
• Individuals caring for the children under a customary care agreement, kinship arrangement or a custody order; and
• The bands or communities of Indigenous children.
Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection
|xiv|
Expert reports
4. The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rules to
a. 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 b. 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.
(SO DOES THIS ONE MEAN THE CAS WILL HAVE TO SUPPLY THE COURT WITH TWO CROOKED EXPERTS NOW?)
Temporary proceedings
5. The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rules to require courts to assess the necessity for and reliability of any expert evidence through a voir dire before admitting that expert’s report into evidence on any motion in a child protection proceeding, except at the first appearance. Deviation from this requirement should only be permitted where the parent expressly acknowledges to the court that the findings of the expert are correct and the court is satisfied that the parent adequately understands the expert opinion and the Consequences of such an acknowledgement.
6. The Ontario government should amend the Child, Youth and Family Services Act to prohibit the admission of hearsay evidence of expert opinion, including test results and the interpretation of those results, at any stage of a child protection proceeding other than the first appearance.
Deviation from this requirement should only be permitted where the parent expressly acknowledges to the court that the findings of the expert are correct and the court is satisfied that the parent adequately understands the expert opinion and the consequences of such an acknowledgement.
Summary judgment motions
7. The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rule relating to summary judgment motions to a. permit only evidence that would be admissible at trial, and in particular, to prohibit hearsay evidence that does not meet the common law tests for admissibility;
b. require all expert evidence tendered at a summary judgment motion to comply with the Rule regarding experts and expert reports (as amended by these Recommendations);
c. require the court to conduct a voir dire before admitting any expert evidence; and
d. permit deviation from these requirements only where the parent expressly
acknowledges to the court that the findings of the expert are correct and the court is satisfied that the parent adequately understands the expert opinion and the consequences of such an acknowledgement.
Report of the Motherisk Commission
|xv|
Strengthening Families and Communities
Funding for band representatives
13. The federal government should immediately provide adequate funding for First Nations band representatives. The Ontario government should help to support their ongoing training needs.
The Ontario government should also move quickly, in consultation with Métis and Inuit peoples, to determine how representatives from these communities will be identified and funded to participate in child protection proceedings under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act.
http://motheriskcommission.ca/wp-content/uploads/Report-of-the-Motherisk-Commission.pdf
:::
:::
OACPL Response to Canadian Lawyer Magazine
FEBRUARY 26, 2019. TAMMY LAW.
As President of the Toronto Chapter of the Ontario Association of Child Protection Lawyers (“the OACPL”), I was incensed to read the following article “Protecting the Most Vulnerable”, which was published in its latest issue.
The Ontario Association of Child Protection Lawyers started in Spring 2017 in Windsor, Ontario with a group of Family Lawyers who saw an increased need to increase TO GET THEIR STORIES STRAIGHT AND COVER THEIR ASSES ...
OACPL
https://oacpl.org
https://www.tammylaw.ca/oacpl-response-to-canadian-lawyer-magazine/
https://www.canadianlawyermag.com/practice-areas/family/protecting-the-most-vulnerable/275829
https://99.79.133.205/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/2019-02-26-Letter-to-Canadian-Lawyer-Magazine.pdf
:::
Ontario Court of Appeal Confirms Ongoing “Gatekeeper” Function in Respect of Expert Evidence. Ryan Morris and Ravi Amarnath June 22, 2017.
The Court’s decision in Bruff-Murphy provides valuable guidance as to the nature and extent of a court’s “gatekeeper” responsibility with respect to the admission of expert evidence both when the evidence is first sought to be admitted and thereafter, if prejudice emerges that was not apparent at the time of admission.
https://www.blakesbusinessclass.com/ontario-court-of-appeal-confirms-ongoing-gatekeeper-function-in-respect-of-expert-evidence/
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/christie-blatchford-getting-to-the-root-of-ontarios-family-law-mess
:::
ALLEGATIONS OF CHILD ABUSE IN THE CONTEXT OF PARENTAL SEPARATION: A DISCUSSION PAPER
2001-FCY-4E
3.1 Offences for False Allegations of Abuse.
Continued below:
https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/fl-lf/divorce/2001_4/p3.html
:::
DO ONTARIO CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY'S WORKERS FIT THE DEFINITION OF A PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR UNDER THE ACT AND SHOULD THEY BE ACCOUNTABLE TO AN INVESTIGATIVE CODE OF CONDUCT?
A private investigator is a person who performs work, for remuneration, that consists primarily of conducting investigations in order to provide information. 2005, c. 34, s. 2 (2).
The Private Security and Investigative Services Act, 2005 (PSISA) regulates the private security industry. The PSISA was proclaimed into force on August 23, 2007 to help professionalize the security industry, increase public safety and ensure practitioners receive proper training and are qualified to provide PROTECTIVE SERVICES. The PSISA and its regulations govern the way the private security industry operates in Ontario.
INVESTIGATOR ARE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO AN INVESTIGATIVE CODE OF CONDUCT.
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/05p34
HOW DOES THIS ACT NOT APPLY TO THE ONTARIO CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY?
Does Ontario Require a License to be a Private Investigator?
Yes. In the province of Ontario anyone performing the activities of a private investigator is required to hold a valid Ontario Private Investigator License and be employed by a licensed private investigator/agency.
It is illegal to sell yourself as a Private Investigator without holding a license and working for a licensed agency. This does not stop scammers… In Ontario you will find a handful of unlicensed and shady agencies ...
IT'S NOT ABOUT THE STANDARDS, OR LEGISLATION, OR THE BUREAUCRACY - IT'S ABOUT ETHICS AND APPLICATION. IF YOUR GOING TO FIX WHAT'S WRONG WITH CHILD PROTECTION - START AT THE BEGINNING. FUNDAMENTAL JUSTICE.
IT'S NOT THE SYSTEM THAT LACKS ETHICS, MORALS AND ACCOUNTABILITY OR ACTS IN BAD FAITH - IT'S THE PEOPLE ENTRUSTED TO OVERSEE THE SYSTEM THAT LACK THOSE THINGS. IT'S NOT BAD SYSTEM THAT MAKES GOOD WORKERS BAD - IT'S BAD WORKERS THAT MAKE A SYSTEM THAT'S NEITHER GOOD NOR BAD, BAD.
:::
Parents Rights were ripped out by the roots...
“The testing was imposed on people who were among the poorest and most vulnerable members of our society, with scant regard for due process of their rights to privacy and bodily integrity,” the report states.
Without checks, balance or judicial oversight all of the parents who were tested were powerless to resist because they weren't testing people with the resources their own lawyer or to get a second opinion. Poor disadvantaged parents told us that they submitted to the testing under duress, in fear of losing custody of or access to their children” only to lose access or custody anyway.
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.
Respecting Procedural Safeguards:
There is a major power imbalance between an impoverished parent (we know that families of low socio-economic status are hugely overrepresented in the child welfare system) and a state 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.
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.
It is unconscionable that these protections are available to accused persons, but were never considered applicable to parents at the mercy of child protection services.
There is nothing new about the commission's finding that many parents were explicitly or implicitly told that there would be negative consequences if they did not undergo hair testing. In fact, this type of coercive action continues to happen: parents are often given messages that if they do not consent, for example, to a finding that the child is in need of protection, that there will be negative consequences. For example, they may be prevented from bringing further motions, or — more damning in CAS work — labelled as being "uncooperative."
One would have thought that post-Motherisk, we would want parents and children to have more procedural protections and safeguards, and yet, it looks like the opposite is happening again.
In the wake of Motherisk, children's aid societies have continued to emphasize working with parents outside of court on a "voluntarily" basis, which might include parents giving up their children to the agency under a temporary care agreement. These agreements are usually signed without lawyers and circumvent the court, which is the only place the powers of the CAS can be kept in check.
To me, Motherisk is a symptom of a larger problem in child protection work. The Motherisk scandal came about because of the failure of the legal system to protect parents and families. Somehow, we have forgotten that the desire to do good cannot be done at the expense of rights violations.
The balance between protecting children from the risk of harm and protecting parents' and children's basic rights to fairness is a challenging one. It is easy to fall too heavily on the side of overriding a parent's rights in favour of efficiency and expediency. But to ensure that something like Motherisk never happens again, it is something to which everyone involved in child welfare — lawyers, judges and caseworkers — must strive.
Tammy Law is a lawyer practicing in child protection, family and criminal law in Toronto. This column is part of CBC's Opinion section. For more information about this section, please read this editor's blog and our FAQ.
http://www.canada24news.com/opinion/the-motherisk-saga-is-a-symptom-of-a-larger-problem-in-child-protection-work/71858-news
:::
2015: Under suspicion: Concerns about child welfare.
If you need legal help, contact the Human Rights Legal Support Centre at:
Toll Free: 1-866-625-5179
TTY Toll Free: 1-866-612-8627
Website: www.hrlsc.on.ca
http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/under-suspicion-concerns-about-child-welfare
:::
2013: Barbara Kay: Attacking the root of children's aid societies' rot.
Children are not pets. Removing them from the care of their families must be the exception, not the norm.
CAS oversight is desperately needed. As Ontario Ombudsman André Martin said in a recent Toronto Star article: “Every year my office is forced to turn away hundreds of people complaining about children’s aid societies. We are powerless to investigate these cases.” Since 2006, there have been “more than 2,500 people we have been unable to help.” -
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/bkay
:::
2016: IT'S ALL ABOUT AT LEAST MEETING THE MINIMUMS....
According to Mary Ballantyne, CEO of the Ontario Association of Children's Aid Societies achieving excellent child protection standards in Ontario is all about meeting the minimum requirements.
New recruits (leaving out supervisors/managers who are currently responsible for keeping case files open when these under-trained intake workers recommend otherwise?) will have to pass eight standardized courses — and a final exam — during a four-month training period before they are authorized to fully perform child protection duties, including apprehending children suffering neglect or abuse from their parents.
To little to late for tens of thousands of Ontario parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles and bothers and sisters.
That’s a significant change from the current practice, in which workers are authorized to perform all duties the minute they are hired. This has long left children’s aid societies open to complaints from parents questioning the competence of the workers that enter their homes.
The college, which regulates more than 17,400 people involved in social work, should be ready to register child protection workers with a BSW “within the next year or so,” she says. For those without the degree, the college and OACAS are working to set up training and courses that would equal one. Ballantyne expects this process to be complete in three or four years.
Once registered, child protection workers would have their practices, standards and ethical code regulated by the college. The college would have the power to investigate complaints from parents and to discipline workers for professional misconduct or incompetence.
Ballantyne flatly states those who do not register with the college will be unable to perform child protection work in Ontario in 3 or 4 years.
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/04/03/childrens-aid-societies-launch-major-training-reforms.html
:::
"Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 proclaimed in force."
The new regulation was updated to only require Local Directors of Children’s Aid Societies to be registered with the College.
http://www.ocswssw.org/resources/legislation-submissions/
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2234353/
The majority of local directors, supervisors, child protection workers and adoption workers have social work or social service work education, yet fewer than 10% are registered with the OCSWSSW.
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.
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.
As a key stakeholder with respect to numerous issues covered in the CYFSA and the regulations, we were dismayed to learn just prior to the posting of the regulations that we had been left out of the consultation process. We have reached out on more than one occasion to request information about regulations to be made under the CYFSA regarding staff qualifications.
A commitment to public protection, especially when dealing with vulnerable populations such as the children, youth and families served by CASs, is of paramount importance. In short, it is irresponsible for government to propose regulations that would allow CAS staff to operate outside of the very system of public protection and oversight it has established through professional regulation.
Regulations under the CYFSA:
The College has worked with government to address its concerns about regulations under the new CYFSA which set out the qualifications of Children’s Aid Society (CAS) staff. Upon learning in late November that the proposed regulations would continue to allow CAS workers to avoid registration with the College, the College immediately engaged with MCYS and outlined its strong concerns in a letter to the Minister of Children and Youth Services and a submission to the Ministry of Children and Youth Services during the consultation period.
The new regulation was updated to require Local Directors of Children’s Aid Societies to be registered with the College.
We are pleased to note that, while the new regulation does not currently require CAS supervisors to be registered, we have received a "commitment" FROM THE OUTGOING WYNNE GOVERNMENT to work with the College and the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies toward a goal of requiring registration of CAS supervisors beginning January 2019.
Key concerns:
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 new regulation was updated to only require Local Directors of Children’s Aid Societies to be registered with the College.
The majority of local directors, supervisors, child protection workers and adoption workers have social work or social service work education, yet fewer than 10% are registered with the OCSWSSW.
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."
A "social worker" or a "social service worker" is by law someone who is registered with the OCSWSSW. Furthermore, as noted previously, the Ontario public has 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), that person is registered with the OCSWSSW.
The OCSWSSW also has processes for equivalency, permitting those with a combination of academic qualifications and experience performing the role of a social worker or social service worker to register with the College.
These processes address, among other things, the risk posed by "fake degrees" and other misrepresentations of qualifications, ensuring Ontarians know that a registered social worker or social service worker has the education and/or experience to do their job.
The review of academic credentials and knowledge regarding academic programs is an area of expertise of a professional regulatory body. An individual employer will not have the depth of experience with assessing the validity of academic credentials nor the knowledge of academic institutions to be able to uncover false credentials or misrepresentations of qualifications on a reliable basis.
Setting, maintaining and holding members accountable to the Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. These minimum standards apply to all OCSWSSW members, regardless of the areas or context in which they practise. Especially relevant in the child welfare context are principles that address confidentiality and privacy, competence and integrity, record-keeping, and sexual misconduct.
Maintaining fair and rigorous complaints and discipline processes. These processes differ from government oversight systems and process-oriented mechanisms within child welfare, as well as those put in place by individual employers like a CAS. They focus on the conduct of individual professionals.
Furthermore, transparency regarding referrals of allegations of misconduct and discipline findings and sanctions ensures that a person cannot move from employer to employer when there is an allegation referred to a hearing or a finding after a discipline hearing that their practice does not meet minimum standards.
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
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.
:::
DRAFT Letter 9 – Varied backgrounds
2016: Regulation of child protection workers by Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers: CUPE responds. (UPDATED 2019)
Please send or adapt any of the following letters to the Executive Director of your CAS.
"I may not hold a BSW or MSW degree, enjoy membership in the College or be subject to its regulation. But I feel like professional practitioner in the child protection sector and, as such, I cannot countenance this move toward the regulation of the child protection workforce. I am resolved to fight it at every step of the way and instead campaign for the measures that will bring real benefits to at-risk youth, children and families."
(The author feels like a professional?)
"I am not a social worker; I don’t want to be a social worker. Had I wanted to be a social worker, I would have trained as one. If regulation through the College of Social Work is introduced, what will happen to us child protection workers who don’t have degrees in social work (a BSW or MSW) or a social service worker diploma? After all, we make up to 50% of the child protection workforce."
Sincerely,
(50% should scare the living shit out of any average person, using normal and honest judgment ---> AND IS IT ANY FREAKIN' WONDER THE "UNION" IS AGAINST REGULATION)
I wish to express my strong opposition to the planned introduction of mandatory registration with the Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers. I object to the move on several grounds, but I perceive one of the greatest dangers for the future of the sector to lie in restricting child protection work to those who hold only BSW or MSW degrees.
I have worked for [##] years in this sector. In that time, I have personally witnessed the benefits of having colleagues who come to the sector from a variety of backgrounds and bring a wide breadth of experience to the job.
Multidisciplinary child protection teams are a strength. Working alongside child protection workers whose education is in psychology, sociology or mental health enriches the services they provide to children, youth and families, as well as the working environment we all share.
Similarly, those colleagues with backgrounds in such areas as children and youth justice offer insight and knowledge that would not normally form part of BSW or MSW. Sometimes a colleague has gained qualifications outside the country and brings unique cultural or community perspectives to our work.
The variety of approaches, connections and methods in child protection enhances our work in countless ways.
This type of practice, and the accompanying opportunities for exchange and learnings, will be lost in a sector that narrows its potential source of employees to include only College-registered recruits who hold BSWs and MSWs. Agencies will lose the breadth of experience these workers bring to child protection work and the varied backgrounds that inform new and different approaches in child protection work.
I do not believe this is good practice for child protection work in the 21st century. We should be looking at ways of expanding our approach to our work, not restricting it to fit the strictures of the Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers.
http://cupe2190.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SSWCC_CAS-letters-re-college-regulation_Nov.-2016.pdf
:::
You can hear former MPP Frank Klees say in a video linked below the very reason the social worker act was introduced and became law in 1998 was to regulate the "children's aid societies."
FORMER ONTARIO MPP FRANK KLEES EXPLAINS A DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE WORKS.
I'M NOT A SOCIAL WORKER, I'M A CHILD PROTECTION WORKER!
https://youtu.be/SA1YyWO0RTQ?list=PLsYhw09i3If44rMBDuZQ0ztayzSQU35Fy
TWO DECADES LATER...
The union representing child protection social workers is firmly opposed to oversight from a professional college and the Ministry of Children and Youth Services, which regulates and funds child protection, is so far staying out of it.
The report Towards Regulation notes that the “clearest path forward” would be for the provincial government to -again- legislate the necessity of professional regulation, which would be an appallingly heavy-handed move according to OACAS/Cupe.
http://joincupe2190.ca/files/2015/10/Professional-regulation-at-childrens-aid-societies.pdf
Considering how closely the societies work with law enforcement, the courts and the government who does have the powers and the "particular set of skills" to investigate crimes against children in care? The SIU does.. Or, it should have.
The Special Investigations Unit is the civilian oversight agency responsible for investigating circumstances involving police and child protection social workers that have resulted in a death, serious injury, or allegations of sexual assault of a civilian/child in Ontario, Canada.
https://www.siu.on.ca/en/index.php
AND MAYBE IT'S TIME FOR THE GOVERNMENT TO ACCESS A DIFFERENT KIND OF CHILD WELFARE EXPERT?
See: Robert D. Hare, C.M. (born 1934 in Calgary, Alberta, Canada) is a researcher in the field of criminal psychology. He developed the Hare Psychopathy Checklist (PCL-Revised), used to assess cases of psychopathy. Hare advises the FBI's Child Abduction and Serial Murder Investigative Resources Center (CASMIRC) and consults for various British and North American prison services.
He describes psychopaths as 'social predators', while pointing out that most don't commit murder. One philosophical review described it as having a high moral tone yet tending towards sensationalism and graphic anecdotes, and as providing a useful summary of the assessment of psychopathy but ultimately avoiding the difficult questions regarding internal contradictions in the concept or how it should be classified.
http://www.psychology-criminalbehavior-law.com/2015/01/hare-psychopath/
No comments:
Post a Comment