Tuesday, December 24, 2019

INTERVIEW with Director of Service for Family and Children's Services of...





SELF REGULATION AND THE ONTARIO CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY.

Industry self-regulation is the process whereby members of an industry, trade or sector of the economy monitor their own adherence to legal, ethical, or safety standards, rather than have an outside, independent agency such as a third party entity or in cases where the government doesn't provide the sole funding for the agency in question - a governmental regulator to monitor and enforce those standards.[1] Self-regulation may ease compliance and ownership of standards, but it can also give rise to conflicts of interest.

More CAS videos here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCjZ_knKT_FWLiUecMh3FFbw
If any organization, such as a corporation or government bureaucracy, is asked to eliminate unethical behavior within their own group, it may be in their interest in the short run to eliminate the appearance of unethical behavior, rather than the behavior itself, by keeping any ethical breaches hidden, instead of exposing and correcting them.
An exception occurs when the ethical breach is already known by the public. In that case, it could be in the group's interest to end the ethical problem to which the public has knowledge, but keep remaining breaches hidden.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/03/15/province_in_talks_with_peel_childrens_aid_society_over_strategies_in_leaked_memo.html
Another exception would occur in industry sectors with varied membership, such as international brands together with small and medium size companies where the brand owners would have an interest to protect the joint sector reputation by issuing together self-regulation so as to avoid smaller companies with less resources causing damage out of ignorance. Similarly, the reliability of a professional group such as lawyers and journalists could make ethical rules work satisfactorily as a self-regulation if they were a pre-condition for adherence of new members.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2016/08/15/childrens-aid-societies-should-not-discriminate-against-poor-children-editorial.html
An organization can maintain control over the standards to which they are held by successfully self-regulating. If they can keep the public from becoming aware of their internal problems, this also serves in place of a public relations campaign to repair such damage. The cost of setting up an external enforcement mechanism is avoided. If the self-regulation can avoid reputational damage and related risks to all actors in the industry, this would be a powerful incentive for a pro-active self-regulation [without the necessity to assume it is to hide something].

I AM YOUR CHILDREN'S AD CAMPAIGN

http://www.oacas.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/1011annualreport.pdf

Self-regulating attempts may well fail, due to the inherent conflict of interest in asking any organization to police itself. If the public becomes aware of this failure, an external, independent organization is often given the duty of policing them, sometimes with highly punitive measures taken against the organization. The results can be disastrous, such as a military with no external, independent oversight, which may commit human rights violations against the public. Not all businesses will voluntarily meet best practice standards, leaving some users exposed.

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/motherisk/

Governments may prefer to allow an industry to regulate itself but maintain a watching brief over the effectiveness of self-regulation and be willing to introduce external regulation if necessary. For example, in the UK, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee in 2015 investigated the role of large accountancy firms in relation to tax avoidance and argued that "Government needs to take a more active role in regulating the tax industry, as it evidently cannot be trusted to regulate itself".

If the public becomes aware of this failure, an external, independent organization is often given the duty of policing them, sometimes with highly punitive measures taken against the organization.

The results can be disastrous, such as a child welfare society with no external, independent oversight, which may commit human rights violations against the public. Not all government funded private businesses will voluntarily meet best practice standards, leaving some or most families exposed.

:::

Corporatism is a political ideology which advocates the organization of society by corporate groups, such as agricultural, labour, military, scientific, or guild associations on the basis of their common interests.

:::

CONSIDERING HOW CLOSELY THE CHILDREN'S AID SOCIETY WORKS WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT, THE GOVERNMENT AND THE COURTS - AND HOW OFTEN CHILD ARE HARMED OR WORSE IN ONTARIO'S CARE...

The Special Investigations Unit is the civilian oversight agency responsible for investigating circumstances involving law enforcement (and why not the super secretive powerful as god children's aid societies as well?) that have resulted in a death, serious injury, or allegations of sexual assault of a civilian in Ontario, Canada.

The mandate of the SIU is to maintain confidence in Ontario's services by assuring the public that official actions resulting in serious injury, death, or allegations of sexual assault are subjected to rigorous, independent investigations.Nov 1, 2019.

https://www.siu.on.ca/en/index.php

:::

Allan Hogan, the former executive director of Family and Children’s Services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville, was asked later, during an interview at his Herriott Street office in Perth, on Monday, Sept. 21, if he was OK with his workers being filmed during interactions with families.

https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesUnitedOntario/videos/504782689731500/

“We…” he began saying, before pausing. “People do have the opportunity to record or videotape us.

For the rest of the story read the Smiths Falls Record News Obituary By Desmond Devoy.

https://www.insideottawavalley.com/news-story/5926359-cas-watchdog-opens-new-local-chapter/

:::

“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 lower threshold for reporting simple suspicion to open files to meet funding goals.

(Can there really be two standards for reasonable grounds and still be reasonable?)

http://www.oacas.org/childrens-aid-child-protection/duty-to-report/

:::

“The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.”

It’s a question of education to teach people to be on their guard against the sort of verbal booby traps into which they are always being led, to analyze the kind of things that are said to them. I think it’s terribly important to insist on individual values, that every human being is unique. And it is, of course, on this genetic basis that the whole idea of the value of freedom is based.

https://blankonblank.org/interviews/aldous-huxley-on-technodictators-booby-traps-technology-drugs-brave-new-world-soma-overpopulation-presidents/#read-more

:::

2019: There’s no rule on who can write assessments that ‘effectively decide’ if an Ontario parent loses their child. Experts say that must change

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/08/02/theres-no-rule-on-who-can-write-assessments-that-effectively-decide-if-an-ontario-parent-loses-their-child-experts-say-that-must-change.html

:::

2019: Province orders children’s aid societies to review credentials of experts used in child welfare cases

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/08/23/province-orders-childrens-aid-societies-to-review-credentials-of-experts-used-in-child-welfare-cases.html

:::

2019: Expert who gave more than 100 assessments in Ontario child protection cases lied about credentials for years, judge finds

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2019/07/31/expert-who-gave-more-than-100-assessments-in-ontario-child-protection-cases-lied-about-credentials-for-years-judge-finds.html

:::

2017: All of us can be harmed': Investigation reveals hundreds of Canadians have phoney degrees

A Marketplace investigation of the world's largest diploma mill has discovered many Canadians could be putting their health and well-being in the hands of nurses, engineers, counsellors and other professionals with phoney credentials.

Fake diplomas are a billion-dollar industry, according to experts, and Marketplace obtained business records of its biggest player, a Pakistan-based IT firm called Axact. The team spent months combing through thousands of degree transactions, cross referencing personal information with customers' social media profiles.

The investigation revealed more than 800 Canadians could have purchased a fake degree.

"Keep in mind this is just the one operation," said Allen Ezell, a former FBI agent who investigated diploma mills for decades. "This does not give you totality of how many are being sold throughout Canada by all schools that are operating."

Ezell, who co-wrote the book Degree Mills: The Billion-Dollar Industry That Has Sold Over a Million Fake Diplomas, estimates half of new PhDs issued every year in the U.S. are fake.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/diploma-mills-marketplace-fake-degrees-1.4279513

:::

2010: Psychologist got degree from U.S. 'diploma mill'

A psychologist with the Durham Children’s Aid Society has pleaded guilty to professional misconduct for misrepresenting himself and for making multiple unqualified diagnoses of mental illness.

Gregory Carter, 63, appeared before the College of Psychologists of Ontario’s disciplinary committee on Tuesday. He and the college agreed on the terms of the penalty, which includes a three-month suspension, a recorded reprimand and one year of supervised practice under an approved practitioner.

In his practice with the Children’s Aid Society, Mr. Carter’s expertise was used to determine child custody cases.

A Whitby man who lost his children, now aged 7 and 9, said Tuesday’s judgment is a good starting point.

“The problem I have is that it didn’t really do anything to fix the problems that he’s caused,” said Mr. S., whose full name cannot be revealed to protect his children’s identities. “It’s like a child who creates a mess: He created a mess, then just gets a time-out.”

Lawyer George Callahan said the criminal charges against Mr. Carter seem to be piling up and a civil suit with multiple complainants likely will proceed concurrently.

“A side issue to all of this is that the CAS took steps based upon Gregory Carter’s report,” he said.

Mr. Carter’s credentials with the college still remain in question. On its website Mr. Carter is listed as qualified to practise clinical psychology. However Mr. Carter is a psychological associate and not a clinical psychologist, since the province requires clinical psychologists to obtain a doctoral degree.

Mr. Carter completed his master’s degree at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education in 1978 and got a PhD in 1991 from California’s Pacific Western University, which the U.S. government in 2004 accused of being a “diploma mill.”

An investigation into Mr. Carter started in November 2008, when a Durham man lost custody of his granddaughter, now 11.

https://nationalpost.com/posted-toronto/psychologist-got-degree-from-u-s-diploma-mill

:::

Here are some facts and figures I think point to significant problems for the child welfare sector and for CAS in particular when it comes to reviewing the credentials of their "hand picked" experts who provide the results they want when they want them:

• There are over 5,000 child protection workers in Ontario (5160)

• The College regulates about 17,000 social workers and social service workers

• In Ontario, only 7% of College-registered social workers are employed by a CAS

• Only 4% of members of the Ontario Association of Social Workers work for a CAS

• Between 30% and 50% of Ontario’s child welfare workers do NOT hold a BSW

• Only 63% of direct service staff in CASs have a BSW or MSW (in 2012, it was 57%)

• Only 78% of direct service supervisors have a BSW or MSW (in 2012, it was 75.5%)

• The 2013 OACAS Human Resources survey estimates that 70% of relevant CAS job classifications would qualify for registration with the College (so about 1500 CAS currently employed workers would be unable to register with the College)

• From 2002 to 2014, 41 child welfare employees who did not hold a BSW or MSW submitted equivalency applications to register as social workers; only 16 were successful and 25 were refused. (was the test to hard for them and cause for concern, are those 25 who couldn't pass the test still loose on the streets...?)

SEE: http://cupe2190.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/SSWCC_CAS-letters-re-college-regulation_Nov.-2016.pdf

:::

The Ontario government doesn't require CAS workers to obtain warrants to conduct searches of private homes and allows unqualified unregistered CAS workers to authorize the police to act without a warrant on their behalf.

Canadian Criminal (or alleged violations of government standards?) Procedure and Practice/Search and Seizure: Meaning of a "Search"

Any police officer's (child protection social worker?) conduct interfering with a reasonable expectation of privacy is a "search".[1]

Any "inspection is a search" where a "person has a reasonable privacy interest in the object or subject matter of the state action and the information to which it gives access".[2]

Knocking at the door for an investigative purpose is not a search.[3]

However, going onto private property and peering into windows while attempting to detect signs of child abuse or neglect can constitute a search.[4]

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Canadian_Criminal_Procedure_and_Practice/Search_and_Seizure/Print_version

:::

Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Purpose. Section 7 of the Charter requires that laws or state actions (or government funded multi-billion dollar private corporations?) that interfere with life, liberty and security of the person conform to the principles of fundamental justice — the basic principles that underlie our notions of justice and fair process (Charkaoui v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] 1 SCR 350 at paragraph 19).

The wording of section 7 says that it applies to "everyone". This includes all people within Canada, including non-citizens.[4] It does not, however, apply to corporations.[5]

#5 Right to silence. In R v Hebert the court held that the right to silence was a principle of fundamental justice. Statements of the accused may not be achieved through police (worker?) trickery and silence may not be used to make any inference of guilt.

WHY THE RIGHT TO SILENCE?

Loaded questions are similar to leading questions in that they subtly (or not so subtly) push the user toward a particular response. The defining feature of this question type is the assumption about the respondent that is included implicitly in the question. Loaded questions can seem pretty benign at a first glance.

A leading question is when the question suggests the desired answer. "Did he hit you with a shovel?"

A loaded question means any yes or no answer would incriminate the responder. "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

Section 7 rights can also be violated by the conduct of a party other than a Canadian government body. The government need only be a participant or complicit in the conduct threatening the right, where the violation must be a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the government actions.[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_7_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

:::

The current hierarchical corporate structures that dominate our economies have been in place for over 200 years and were notably supported and defined by Max Weber during the 1800s. Even though Weber was considered a champion of bureaucracy, he understood and articulated the dangers of bureaucratic organisations as stifling, impersonal, formal, protectionist and a threat to individual freedom, equality and cultural vitality.

32 MOTHERISK COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS.

#4 Disclosure. The Family Rules Committee should amend the Family Law Rules to require children’s aid societies to provide automatic, ongoing, thorough and timely court disclosure to parents.

https://www.attorneygeneral.jus.gov.on.ca/english/about/pubs/motherisk/

:::

CONSENT TO INTERCEPTION - CANADA.

Documenting the facts is not a crime...

Broadly speaking, Canadians can legally record their own conversations with other people, but not other peoples' conversations that they are not involved in.

183.1 Where a private communication is originated by more than one person or is intended by the originator thereof to be received by more than one person, a consent to the interception thereof by any one of those persons is sufficient consent for the purposes of any provision of this Part. [1993, c.40, s.2.]

The Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 [Criminal Code] imposes a general prohibition on interception (recording) of private communications, but then provides an exception where one of the parties to the private communication consents to the interception of that communication. Thus, broadly speaking, Canadians can legally record their own conversations with other people, but not other people's conversations that they are not involved in.

Other legislation in Canada protects various privacy rights, but does not prevent Canadians from recording their own conversations with others.

http://www.legaltree.ca/node/908

:::

CAS calls Mom a hacker after she publicly speaks out, $75 million dollar lawsuit and charges pending TRIAL SUMMER 2019.

Kelley Denham, while doing research on FCSLLG's internal complaint process on the agency's privately operated public information website that also serves as an advertising platform for the agency, Kelley manually typed an address to information she was referencing in her complaint but left off the filename of the precise document she wanted, which took her to a directory on the site's uploads page where she stumbled across internal agency financial documents, minutes of meetings, client files and the personal information of a large number of people looking for a six figure salary.

According to Raymond Lemay the agency's website had multiple layers of security protecting it though he failed to mention that FCSLLG's website is hosted on a U.S. server in Michigan that coincidentally deletes all log files every 30 days and keeps no backups..

The agency has stated in the courts it doesn't matter if they wrongful accused Kelley of hacking them and there site wasn't protected by multiple layers of security or that the Supreme Court has ruled posting a link to something that was published by (FCSLLG) another isn't publishing because they FCSLLG says disgruntled Kelley Denham was just out to get them after she forced them to withdraw a request for a supervision order from court and then after FCSLLG referred our family to another agency - the judge awarded Kelley legals costs of $750 dollars after she forced Kingston's CAS lawyer to withdraw a motion and a request for a supervision order.. FCSLLG now denies Kingston's claim they were only acting as an agent for FCSLLG based on the information FCSLLG gave them.

The news report also fails to mention the outside internet expert they hired is project manager Margret Row's son in law who lives in her basement.. The "expert" was hired after Kelley copied the documents as evidence of what see'd seen and made a video featuring the agency's internal financial documents and ministry directives which she sent to the agency. He made recommendations not to improve the agency's security but instead to remove documents from the site to protect themselves (which they did) only from some reason the client files weren't removed.

In a state of desperation to have not just her own information removed but all the other families information removed as well she informed the pubic of the problem by posting a picture of a link to a document published (in secret) on FCSLLG's site.

FCSLLG has stated that there was nothing wrong with there website operations until Kelley ratted them out...

Kelley speaking to TV news reporter after FCSLLG alleged their privately operated public information website that also doubles as an advertising platform for their services..

https://youtu.be/kLOgGC8k-5o

:::

2019: Alleged Ontario CAS Hacker Trial Transcript available to download for free... A 70$ value no strings attached.. (also for absolutely no cost to you we'll include the final legal submissions and the verdict as soon as they become available ....)

Look for the transcript PDF here:
https://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/247562/alleged-ontario-cas-hacker-trial-update-190814

:::

This next 120 minute video is the beginning of Family and Children's Services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville's internal complaint process.

Meet Kim Morrow, former unregistered director of service for Family and Children's services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville. Kim Morrow had 30 plus years of experience. In this recording you can listen as Kim explains away FCSLLG's failure to investigate objectively, taking a biased position throughout, and failing to re-assess and adjust FCSLLG's position as FCSLLG had a statutory duty to do when faced with information that did not support FCSLLG's original position as just being bumps on the road.

Watch Kim Morrow act like she's never seen the documents we filed with the family court and listen to intake manager Erin Lee Marcotte's reaction to Kim as Kim claims to have been unaware of the documents.

Listen Kim explains she doesn't feel a sworn affidavit should be a verbatim accounting of facts but should embody the spirit and intent of what happened.

Listen also as Kim explains taking my family to court asking for a supervision order was just part of the society's investigative process.

It my belief Kim was aware of the documents but was unaware we had actually sworn the documents in, officially served them and officially filed them with the court and hadn't just walked up to their office and just handed our children's confidential information over to Family and Children's services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville's legal department in person.

Unfortunately the complaint process came to abrupt and sudden end when we wouldn't agree to sign a legally binding document agreeing not to document (record) the complaint process for legal purposes.

It’s not about the standards, it’s about the ethics and application.

https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesUnitedOntario/videos/499149713628131/

:::

The Final Call - Denham vs. FCSLLG.

This is an audio of my wife's second and last conversation with the Director of Service for Family and Children’s Services of Lanark, Leeds and Grenville regarding the progress of our complaint through the legislated processes.

In this recording the complaint process comes to a sudden end as the complaint now includes Kim Morrow's statements from her first meeting with Kelley Denham and still remains in charge of the complaint process. No conflicts here..

You can hear Kim's desperation grow as she unsuccessfully attempts to manipulate my wife throughout this conversation:

https://youtu.be/HALda2OHg4s

:::

FCSLLG in "We are not social workers, we are child protection workers"

Meet Lisa Muir unregistered service manager for FCSLLG in this short recording.

https://youtu.be/YAU_PjjuBv4

:::

Is it illegal to record someone speaking directly to you either overtly or covertly because someone in a position authority is acting unethically or committing a criminal act?

Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)

Act current to 2019-01-30 and last amended on 2018-12-18. Previous Versions

Consent to interception

183.1 Where a private communication is originated by more than one person or is intended by the originator thereof to be received by more than one person, a consent to the interception thereof by any one of those persons is sufficient consent for the purposes of any provision of this Part.

1993, c. 40, s. 2.
Date modified: 2019-02-14

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/section-183.1.html

:::

ONE YEAR LATER KIM MORROW REFERS OUR FAMILY TO THE KINGSTON CAS - 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..

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.

Sun Wai in the video with the full support of her supervisor informs the mother she's not going to tell the mother what her concerns are and has made the decision to keep her "concerns" from the her because knowing what those concerns are would put too much pressure on the mother according to Sun Wai - just before telling the mother the society has filed for a supervision order of her children then refuses to serve the mother. How is that not putting intense pressure on the mother? It's abusive on so many levels.

After repeatedly promising to give, in writing, a list of concerns and the basis for them to the parents - this woman, close to 50 days later, claims that telling the parents her concerns about their children's safety might inadvertently harm their children - but if that's so, isn't preventing them from addressing her concerns (if valid) more likely to harm their children. Can Sun Wai's obvious malicious intentions be in the "best interest of the child."

So what happened? The society withdrew both the application for a supervision order and a motion before the court (what the motion was, we still don't know) and the judge ordered the society to pay the legal costs ($750.00) incurred by the family forth-with after reading a letter sent to the family the night before the first appearance and signed by Sun Wai, explaining the reasons for her failing to give a list of her concerns and the basis for them to the family and time to address those concerns as being a part of the Ontario children's aid society's anti-oppressive policy to avoid causing families the undue stress of knowing what they've been accused of doing wrong.

https://www.facebook.com/FamiliesUnitedOntario/videos/570836186459483/

Do you want to see the cheque?

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10154251353557104&set=a.47917112103.62320.596627103&type=3

Ontario CAS Dirty Tricks:

There's a knock at the door, it's after dark Wednesday and we weren't expecting anyone. We're a bit worried it's the worker wanting to come in again. We go to the door, it's a same day courier and he wants us to sign. We've been served.

We have to respond to the worker's concerns, swear in the responding documents and serve them before the end of that coming Friday. Two days to do what lawyers take weeks to do. We have a little over a week till the first appearance....

READ THE FULL STORY HERE:
http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/153438/ontario-cas-dirty-tricks

This is very much a first, as far as I can tell. “Mr. Rogers, it will be a short retainer”

CAS ordered to pay my legal costs after Judge rules they unnecessarily brought our family to court, at the cost of Ontario tax-payers. One month later, I have the cheque in hand. Visit kelleyandderek.com

http://unpublishedottawa.com/letter/116313/%E2%80%9Cmr-rogers-it-will-be-short-retainer%E2%80%9D

:::

"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.

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.

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

http://www.ocswssw.org/resources/legislation-submissions/

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.

Without the deterrents professional regulation provides what prevents child protection social workers from being or becoming a danger to children and their families?

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

:::

FORMER ONTARIO MPP FRANK KLEES EXPLAINS "A DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE.

You can hear former conservative 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."

I'M NOT A SOCIAL WORKER, I'M A CHILD PROTECTION WORKER!

https://youtu.be/SA1YyWO0RTQ?list=PLsYhw09i3If44rMBDuZQ0ztayzSQU35Fy

Powerful As God - The Children's Aid Societies of Ontario is a documentary that delves into society's most controversial and secretive topics.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2234353/

Social Work and Social Service Work Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 31
https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/98s31

:::

Under suspicion: Concerns about child welfare.

In 2015, the Ontario Human Rights Commission (OHRC) began a year-long consultation to learn more about the nature of profiling in Ontario. Our aim was to gather information to help us guide organizations, individuals and communities on how to identify, address and prevent profiling. We connected with people and organizations representing diverse perspectives. We conducted an online survey, analyzed cases (called applications) at the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario that alleged profiling, held a policy dialogue consultation, and reviewed academic research. We conducted focus groups with Indigenous peoples and received written submissions. Overall, almost 1,650 individuals and organizations told us about their experiences or understanding of profiling in Ontario.

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

:::

Considering how closely the societies work with law enforcement who does have the powers and the "particular set of skills" to investigate crimes against children in care? The SIU does..

The Special Investigations Unit is the civilian oversight agency responsible for investigating circumstances involving police (and child protection social workers, why not) 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.

Hare received his Ph.D. in experimental psychology at University of Western Ontario (1963). He is professor emeritus of the University of British Columbia where his studies center on psychopathology and psychophysiology. He was invested as a Member of the Order of Canada on December 30, 2010.

Hare wrote a popular science bestseller published in 1993 entitled Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us (reissued 1999).

http://www.psychology-criminalbehavior-law.com/2015/01/hare-psychopath/

:::

Motherisk Is A Symptom Of A Larger Problem In Child Protection Work.

“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 "voluntary" 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

:::

Experts All Over The World Excluding Canadian Experts Warn There's a Huge Problem With How Mental Health Problems Are Diagnosed.

(kiss child welfare's bread and butter good-bye, no more getting the results they want when they want them)

A new study, published in Psychiatry Research, has concluded that psychiatric diagnoses are scientifically worthless as tools to identify discrete mental health disorders.

The study, led by researchers from the University of Liverpool, involved a detailed analysis of five key chapters of the latest edition of the widely used Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), on 'schizophrenia', 'bipolar disorder', 'depressive disorders', 'anxiety disorders' and 'trauma-related disorders'.

Diagnostic manuals such as the DSM were created to provide a common diagnostic language for mental health professionals and attempt to provide a definitive list of mental health problems, including their symptoms.

The main findings of the research were:

Almost all diagnoses mask the role of trauma and adverse events.

Psychiatric diagnoses all use different decision-making rules...

There is a huge amount of overlap in symptoms between diagnoses.

Diagnoses tell us little about the individual patient and what treatment they need.

The authors conclude that diagnostic labelling represents 'a disingenuous categorical system'.

Lead researcher Dr Kate Allsopp, University of Liverpool, said: "Although diagnostic labels create the illusion of an explanation they are scientifically meaningless and can create stigma and prejudice. I hope these findings will encourage mental health professionals to think beyond diagnoses and consider other explanations of mental distress, such as trauma and other adverse life experiences."

Professor Peter Kinderman, University of Liverpool, said: "This study provides yet more evidence that the biomedical diagnostic approach in psychiatry is not fit for purpose. Diagnoses frequently and uncritically reported as 'real illnesses' are in fact made on the basis of internally inconsistent, confused and contradictory patterns of largely arbitrary criteria. The diagnostic system wrongly assumes that all distress results from disorder, and relies heavily on subjective judgments about what is normal."

Professor John Read, University of East London, said: "Perhaps it is time we stopped pretending that medical-sounding labels contribute anything to our understanding of the complex causes of human distress or of what kind of help we need when distressed."

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-07/uol-sfp070819.php

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/07/190708131152.htm

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165178119309114?via%3Dihub

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-way-we-diagnose-psychiatric-conditions-is-scientifically-meaningless-researchers-argue

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/325723.php#1

https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/item/32842-study-psychiatric-diagnoses-worthless-and-scientifically-meaningless

https://neurosciencenews.com/meaningless-psychiatric-diagnosis-14434/

https://repository.uel.ac.uk/item/86w8q

https://www.studyfinds.org/study-psychiatric-diagnoses-are-scientifically-meaningless/

###

The full study, entitled 'Heterogeneity in psychiatric diagnostic classification', can be found here:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2019.07.005

No comments:

Post a Comment