Friday, July 31, 2015

JP v. MCFD - Vancouver Sun story reports mom resorting to the food bank to feed her kids

Ian Mulgrew of the Vancouver Sun wrote a new story that appeared in today's paper. - link to Ian Mulgrew's Vancouver Sun story and video interview of JP

Mom J.P. speaks on camera about her experience in the Vancouver Sun news room.

The first sentence of the Sun article reads:

"The mom and children at the centre of the scathing B.C. Supreme Court ruling against child welfare authorities have turned to food banks in the last two months and are struggling with the fallout of the abuse."

That's harsh.

JP says MCFD is continuing to harass her and her children, as recently as July 20th

During the interview, mom JP reveals that MCFD continues to target her and her children. She says that MCFD sent her a letter July 20th, and she believes that her kids were interviewed at school without her knowledge or permission.

This is MCFD's "investigation" process, where they accumulate intakes, which arise from "reports from the community". So, "someone" continues to report JP's kids to MCFD. MCFD is only too happy to "investigate". MCFD knows full well the results of the lawsuit, seized Judge Walker's views on the quality of MCFD's "investigative" process and unmistakable bias against JP. A new office is dealing with JP, by the way.

So, not only is MCFD thumbing their nose at the ruling, Premiere Christy Clark is doing the same, essentially validating their behavior, by bypassing the Representative for Children and Youth (RCY) Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond in ordering an "independent review" by Bob Plecas. He wrote the CFCSA legislation years ago, as well as several other laws.
This SUN story omits some pertinent information from Justice Walker's ruling, that the foster home to the 4-children of JP for 2-1/2 years, operated by Martha and Romeo Castro in Maple Ridge (229xx 123 Avenue, V2X 4E9, in case you want to write them a letter), was earning $5,500 monthly to "care" for the 4 children.

JP and her children need help from the community, since the "government" has abdicated their responsibility

It seems from the article Ian Mulgrew wrote, that mom JP and her children continue to be left high and dry by MCFD. There focus seems to be, waiting until she fails and they are "forced" to act. She needs help from the community. Contact the Sun. Contact her lawyer's office Hittrich Law.

How you can help J.P. and her children:

Gift certificates or cheques
  • Make these payable to JHLC - Jack Hittrich Law Corporation
Mailing Address
  • 307, 5577 153A Street Surrey, BC V3S 5K7
Credit card donations
  • 604-575-2274. Alex will assist you.
GoFundMe campaign

Family law says after a year, child maintenance must be paid by those who acted as parents. Pay up, MCFD.

In Family Law, if people other than the parents, acting in place of the parents, contribute to the upbringing of the children, after a year, those individuals are financially obligated to continue to ensure that living standard the children enjoyed continues uninterrupted. So, if the parents are poor, the foster home contributes greatly, MCFD should be continuing to ensure the children receive funds so they do not suffer the shock of returning to their parents who have been beaten into poverty by said agency. Pay up MCFD.

Jack Hittrich, JP's lawyer.
So, that would mean as a deterrent for these monster against keeping kids in "care" far longer than CFCSA maximums, beyond that, parents of returned children should expect to receive the same payment as the foster home. That should be a new law embedded into the CFCSA.

Foster care is but a fraction of the cost of the total that taxpayers are on the hook for, so implementing this law would act as a deterrent, and serve as a fiscally enforceable action that would "encourage" social workers to "wrap up" litigation faster, and ensure the "remedial services" are not artificially constrained and trickled out over years. (Foster homes are certified in a few hours, so why to parents need months and years of some stupid counseling course, anger management, children who witness violence, reunification crap counseling?

Foster parents Martha and Romeo Castro paid $5,500 by MCFD monthly for 2-1/2 years

Justice Walker's ruling also records that the school reported several times the children appeared undernourished and arrived at school hungry. So, clearly that $5,500 was not going towards food for the kids.

MCFD returned the children to a parent deprived of all finances due to their incredibly litigious and drawn-out involvement (92 days in the first trail, after 64 days MCFD withdrew saying they had zero child protection concerns at that point), this agency purported to help children, washed their hands of JP and the children completely.

Perhaps they are hoping "something" will happen, some parenting failure that would allow them to step in once again and shout "we told you so" and trumpet their right decision to remove in the first place. Asshole social workers.

Why doesn't MCFD support parents after the children are returned?

So, why, you ask, would MCFD social workers not continue to support families after the children are returned?

Well, once MCFD loses jurisdiction, it is not a "safety" issues, and they have no investigative case or file open, they are prevented by law and the fact zero flow of dollars are available to help parents. They might refer parents to "free" community resources (who get paid according to the volume of parents who use their services).

Supporting family It's not like welfare, if you declare you are broke and have kids, they will give you a few dollars and help pay rent and hydro (certainly not $5,500 monthly tax free).
The ruling reports that MCFD "offered" counseling, only if JP would sign an agreement for services. What this means is, no money changes hands so mom could at least choose her own "help".

The reality is that if MCFD "helps" you, the act of signing such an agreement serves themselves much more. They have in-house "pet" contractors that "help", all right. These people are like investigators that probe parents and feed that information back to MCFD social workers. These workers tell their hired help what questions to ask, what they need recorded. Just in case there is a future removal and this information is required to USE AGAINST PARENTS in the FUTURE.

So, JP refuses such "help". MCFD is not to be trusted in any way, shape or form. Judge Walker understands why as well, and this is an observation he recorded. Parents who are victimized cannot be forced to use the services of MCFD when the information gathered by the service provider is fed back to their handlers, to be used against parents at a later date.

Were the social workers in the JP case fired?

None of the social workers were fired. You, an unwashed taxpaying member of the public might say: "not fired yet maybe, but soon heads will roll...",  don't hold your breath.  MCFD has ignored the intense media and political scrutiny. Really, what is someone going to do, reduce their budget? Hahahaha!

Vancouver Team Leader Social Worker William Strickland, MSW

For example, the judicially reviled social worker William Strickland was a "team leader" in 2009 at the vile Vancouver Broadway office, but NOW, he has been PROMOTED within MCFD to CSM (Community Service Manager) in Victoria. These guys get more than $75,000, so they appear on the salary reporting database of public servants.

It is rumored that social workers in Victoria are less than pleased with this development. Anyone who wants to drop a line and say their piece anonymously, be our guest.

Really though, who wants to work with an individual who has been so thoroughly raked over the coals by a BC Supreme Court Justice? Walker clearly identified "Mr. McFeasance" as a dude who bypasses law and practice standards. Imagine, this guy rubber-stamping removal approvals based on whether or not a parent ruffles his or his staff's feathers? Simply by allowing this reprehensible individual to continue working as a social worker, even invisible buried within the bureacracy, let alone with parents or as a supervisor to other social workers is beyond my understanding.

Well, maybe this is the only case! It's Rare! Is just a family who "fell through the cracks"!

You think this is a one-of? Think again. This is something that MCFD has been guilty of for decades, deliberately crippling parents in order to "win" at all costs, their civil claim and argue their "right" to keep children in expensive foster care for as long as possible. Rarely will parents go public. Rarely do lawsuits happen where we get this level of scrutiny. Rarely are Provincial Judgments publish. Rarely are social worker and foster parent names published in judgments.

Sure, courts are open to the public to sit in and watch. Practically speaking, few do, so that means court proceedings are largely unpublished, not searchable. The public just is not aware. So few parents (less than 1% in BC) are affected by child protection litigation, all the screaming they do on the internet will be largely ignored by the general public.

The Bayne vs. MCFD case, 2010

The Bayne case (papa page: was very much in the media for several years. It took them 5 years to get their kids back. Protests were held in front of Premiere Campbell's office to have the kids returned before the protection hearing began.

The Bayne family

Dr. Margarete Colbourne of the BC Children's hospital "diagnosed" the youngest child to have suffered "shaken baby syndrome", yet this doctor had no biomechanical expertise. Non accidental. No way anything other than one of the parents shaking the bejesus out of their child (who had no associated neck or grasping trauma injuries). MCFD flew the "shaken baby" expert from FLORIDA to testify as their expert witness. The idiot didn't even look at the evidence beforehand, so he was invalidated. The trial was a joke. The social workers were malicious and presumptuous. Social worker Loren Humeny is dead now of cancer, thank god. Very painful death, according to his video just before his death. He was just as crappy a singer as a creepy social worker. That's KARMA for you folks.

The foster parent Kelly Demeare got approximately $10,000 each month for just THREE children, because MCFD declared them all "special needs".  Who knows exatly why ALL THREE were declared special needs. After the hospital deprived the littlest one of care for three months and kept sending parents home with out a proper checkout until Doctor Magic Madame Maggy Colbourne figured out it had to be child abuse (as opposed to, say, medical malpractice for allowing unchecked fluid accumulation after a clearly declared accident several months earlier.)

If a kid slurs their words, or if one of their pet doctor psychologists declares them "special needs" then that extra funding kicks in. No need to spend 7 or 10 years in a university to be a doctor or engineer, just be a former foster kid or best buds with a social worker, and YOU TOO can become fabulously wealthy off the backs of taxpayers and children and pay for your dream home. MCFD will even throw in a NANNY, and respite care, a generous holiday package, insurance in case the little brats break something or annoyingly die "accidentally" on you.

Astoundingly, Provincial Judge Crabtree was promoted to Chief Justice DURING this 30-day trial. He ruled that a 3-month supervision order was warranted. A PCA was conducted, it was wildly positive, glowing (but the family or their lawyer was not allowed to have a copy, and could only read it in a guarded room), and MCFD returned their kids afterwards. They lived happily ever after.

The treatment of the Bayne family by social workers from the Hope Chilliwack area was equal to the JP case in every respect. In some ways, it was far more vicious. The social workers removed their 4th child at birth, during the time Judge Crabtree's ruling was taking it's sweet-ass time of 5-months to be completed.
The family had to sell their home to pay for their first lawyer. They sold their grand piano, Zabeth's piano-teaching business evaporated. Paul lost his job because MCFD was calling his work "investigating" "child abuse" He was unable to get a job during this 5-years of litigation.

The pastor who married them, Ron Unruh, started writing a blog that chronicled the Bayne's family struggle throughout the years.

Ayn van Dyke, the little autistic girl taken from her daddy by MCFD June 2011

This is yet another MCFD horror story. From a similar region that the Bayne's case was from the BC Interior near Abbotsford, which is a 90-minute drive from Vancouver.

Ayn van Dyke and Derek Hoare

Dad had full custody of three children, two autistic. Ayn, the less autistic child (pronounced "eye-n" rather  than "eh-n") was 9 when removed.  Earlier in the week, Ayn climbed the fence via a tree fort, wandered into a neighbors yard, dad called the police not knowing where his daughter was. Police refered the case to MCFD, who in turn decided dad Derek was "overwhelmed" with just this one child, so they took just her, and left her two brothers behind.

So, dad was not a danger to Ayn, otherwise MCFD would have removed the two boys as well. MCFD drugged Ayn into a stupor. They placed her in a home with a teenager, who administered pills to Ayn. Ayn "escaped" twice out of the foster home, one time she was naked and got out of the bathroom window. So, dad was "overwhelmed" leading to him losing Ayn, so what is MCFD, who placed her in a "special needs" equipped home, ostensibly trained to deal with autism?

MCFD kept her for 2-1/2 years, then just gave her back. It is believed mom acquired full custody, so MCFD used that as an excuse to bow out without a protection hearing.

Initially, there was publicity, and a Facebook page quickly gathered several thousand users. Nothing worked to get MCFD to return Ayn sooner.

MCFD needs to have their little red wagon fixed

This is a reprehensible agency that has proven itself time and time again to believe itself to be above the law and not beholden to anyone. They would be right, as of this writing.
  • The CFCSA needs to be rewritten so that social workers cannot unilaterally terminate a parents rights. They should not have child-removal powers at all. Abandoned kids, dead parents, criminally convicted parents, these are cases where there are effectively no legal parents, so by default, carting kids off to foster care can be done equally by police. Social workers need to regain the respect of their profession by keeping them out of the courtroom.
  • Federal incentive to remove children must cease. This cash serves as incentives for the Provinces to take as many kids as possible "as a precaution" in order to get their greedy hands on federal cash.
  • The CFCSA needs to be updated to reflect Family Law that says MCFD as a substitute parent should continue paying parents the same rate as foster homes after 1-year of care has elapsed and the kids are returned after that time.
  • The forms social workers use should have all checkboxes removed; forms should require factually verifiable information, not just "we believe this to be accurate" in a "playing it safe" vein
  • Removals should be authorized by Victoria, as it was in the old days. If the taxpayer is going to be on the hook for months of litigation and tens of thousands of dollars cost, it behooves those responsible to be held accountable for errors if they see the evidence submitted is lacking.
  • Parents accused of abuse or neglect should have a jury trial, similar to criminal proceedings. It is a big thing to remove one's children, then as a result, parents having more children can expect removal at birth by MCFD.
  • Social workers investigating should NOT be allowed to enter children's schools without a prior court order. Schools cannot be viewed as the private temporary interrogation facility of information-fishing intimidation tactics of unregulated workers.
  • They need to be governed by, and become mandatory members of the College of Social workers.
  • Social workers who do not follow MCFD practice standards and abide by the CFCSA need to be fired.
  • Foster homes need to start paying taxes, and be listed in the public accounts.
  • Foster homes need to document the care of children in a far more predictable fashion than they are NOT doing now. The occasional email just doesn't cut it. Record visits by social workers to the home. Record children statements and actions and behaviours, after all, they are supervisors, should they not write down their observations at the time they occur, rather than years later "maybe" recall what "might" have happened?
  • Audits of various offices need to be conducted at random by members of the community. Parents. Doctors, Lawyers (who don't get their income from MCFD)
  • Parents need to be contacted to review their case and provide feedback to quality control agents that do NOT operate under any control by MCFD. Possibly RCY, but I don't trust them to be 100% independent.

1 comment:

  1. Thank you very much for this information
    and BRAVO!!!!


Comments are manually approved to eliminate spam and off topic discussions.