The child protection system in British Columbia is famous for being flawed.  It’s time to fix it.

My own experiences with the Ministry for Child and Family Development (MCFD) in British Columbia were an education in horror.  Unless you’ve had to deal with the MCFD, you don’t fully understand just how bad it gets. It’s a system in which Social Workers can have almost absolute power, and almost no accountability.

• Near-absolute power: One small example of how bad it gets – when a Social Worker stole my children’s iPad, the police officer handling the case refused to proceed because he was afraid of the MCFD. He said, and I quote, the Social Workers have “more power than the police”.  That is how bad things get.  It’s also very true – Social Workers do have powers the police could never have.
• Almost no accountability:  The Minister for the MCFD is not able to intervene – because her mandate prohibits her from getting involved in individual cases.  The MCFD Complaints department is toothless. The Ombudsperson can only give recommendations, not orders. And the Social Workers all protect each other’s decisions.
• A legislative mess: For the falsely accused, there is often no way out other than a very expensive Court battle - with the deck stacked against you, because current legislation means the Courts decide with the MCFD by default. There are no Charter rights protections in Family Law. You are quite literally guilty until you can prove yourself innocent.

In all this, the children suffer. Adults suffer. Families suffer.  This is wrong.

It’s time to make change.

Other petitions come and go, but this one is different.  I understand the law and the issues, and I can write them down in legal-ese.   I can bring this petition to the BC Government, force them to listen, and maybe even spark change.

The petition itself is below.  That is what will get brought to the BC Legislative Assembly, word for word.  There are laws about how a petition has to be formatted if it’s to be brought to the BC Legislative Assembly, so the wording may seem formal or stiff. Sorry about that, but it’s how it has to be.  To help you, the petition starts with a quick 14-point summary, so you can just skip to that if you’re short on time.

There’s a reason for everything I’ve put in the petition. Most of it I’ve experienced personally. If you have a question about an item, please get in touch and I’ll explain it.

There will also be a media component to this.  The petition will also be released to various media sources when it’s ready.

Share this with your friends - the link to this petiition is https://www.change.org/mcfdreform

I’m serious about making change happen. Let’s do this!

- Kas

The Petition
_______________

To the Honourable Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia, in Legislature Assembled:

The petition of the undersigned members of the public of British Columbia state that:

The application of justice, fairness, and accountability of the Ministry of Child and Family Development (“MCFD”) has serious flaws, both within the Ministry and within child protection law.  These flaws hurt both children and adults alike.

Your petitioners submit that:

1. An independent “Watchdog” with binding powers must be set up to monitor the MCFD.
2. Step-parents must have similar rights to biological parents in child protection matters.
3. Child protection law must include basic rights like the presumption of innocence.
4. Child protection “Presentation Hearings” must change as they currently serve no useful practical function.
5. Legal Aid or assistance must be made available to all families and adults, regardless of income, in child protection matters.
6. The MCFD must ensure the basic right of children to be heard, as set out by the United Nations’ Convention of the Rights of the Child and its three Optional Protocols, which has been ratified by Canada.
7. The MCFD must ensure children’s legal rights in care.
8. The MCFD must ensure that legislated timelines and deadlines are reasonable and respected.
9. The MCFD must completely address the concerns and recommendations of the “Plecas Report”.
10. MCFD employees must be consistently held accountable for unethical and illegal actions.
11. The MCFD Complaints system in its current state is broken and must change.
12. The MCFD must ensure transparency and speed in giving parents information about them or their children, and must allow adequate opportunity for those suspected to respond to all allegations made against them.
13. Racial bias is unfair and illegal in any form and must not form part of child protection decisions.
14. The MCFD must be liable for physical or mental harms done to innocent adults and children.

Your petitioners respectfully request that the Honourable House bring the contents of this petition to the notice of the Honourable John Horgan (Premier); the Honourable Katrina Chen (Minister of State for Child Care), the Honourable Katrine Conroy (Minister of Children & Family Development); and the Honourable David Eby (Attorney General).

Your petitioners also respectfully request that the Honourable House discuss whether a committee, standing group, public consultation, or inquiry should be held to investigate the serious matters raised within this Petition and their possible resolutions.

 

Full Basis of Petition

________________

1.       An independent “Watchdog” with binding powers must be set up to monitor the MCFD.

• As there are a multitude of concerns regarding the MCFD, such as those raised by the signatories of this Petition;
• As many of the concerns regard the Child, Family and Community Service Act (“CFCSA”) and/or its practical implementation, the reforms also affect the administration of justice;
• As many of the concerns raised herein involve unfair, unethical and/or illegal treatment of both adults and children by the MCFD, these are serious matters of paramount concern; and
• As the MCFD would be brought into conflicts of interest and inherent bias if tasked to self-police, and may not function effectively, as evidenced by these concerns:

1. An independent inquiry, committee, standing group or public consultation must be held to determine the full scope, nature, and validity of concerns against the MCFD;
2. An independent entity (“Watchdog”) should be set up, mandated, and empowered to act as a force to guide, monitor, review and report upon the MCFD;
3. The Watchdog would be composed of people who are independent of, and not beholden to, the MCFD;
4. The Watchdog would be empowered to intervene, change, or countermand any MCFD clinical decision;
5. The Watchdog would be empowered to issue binding orders and decisions, including imposing sanctions or consequences upon MCFD and its employees, and oblige the MCFD to act on its demands or orders within a certain timeframe;
6. The Watchdog would have the ability to bring violations of rights or laws before the Courts and Tribunals on behalf of adults, families, or children;
7. The Watchdog would be empowered to access all information held by the MCFD, and in particular, demand data and reports from the MCFD regarding handling of cases and conduct in general; and
8. The Watchdog would be mandated and empowered to make reports and assessments of the MCFD’s actions to the public and to Parliament.

________________

2.       Step-parents must have similar rights to biological parents in child protection matters.

• As step-parents are frequently of similar importance to biological parents in the eyes of children in today’s society;
• As there is no inherent difference between the tasks and aid given to a child by a step-parent as compared to a biological parent; and
• As step-parents do not automatically enjoy the same rights, privileges or considerations as biological parents in child protection:

1.  Step-parents should be afforded the standing of biological parents in child protection proceedings in relation to
   i.      Right of access to their child;
   ii.      Right to a Social Worker;
   iii.      Right to private communication with their child, as well as other rights as laid out in s.70 of  the CFCSA;
   iv.      Right to be involved in any decisions affecting their child; and
   v.      Right to party status in any judicial proceedings originating from the CFCSA affecting their child.
   
   

________________

3.       Child protection law must include basic rights like the presumption of innocence.

• As the “paramount” importance of children’s protection cannot supersede human rights or the principles of fundamental justice;
• As the impact of lengthy trial delays upon a child in protection proceedings is extreme and often harmful;
• As the administrative load upon the Courts does not supersede the child’s paramount rights not to be harmed;
• As there is presently no obligation for the MCFD to provide assessment, reunification or rehabilitation services to an accused, nor provide an accused with information as to how he or she might satisfy MCFD concerns;
• As the net result of the lack of obligation for the MCFD to provide such assessments or services is increased unnecessary utilization of the Courts; and
• As the ramifications of child protection proceedings can be highly prejudicial or extreme in natures similar to Criminal Law:

1. All parents, step-parents or caregivers of a child must be afforded the presumption of innocence and the right to a trial within a reasonable time;
2. The MCFD must bear the onus of proof in all cases;
3. Child protection proceedings made upon an allegation of theoretical future risk, where no prior harm or crime has been shown to occur, must bear an especially onerous burden of proof upon the MCFD – such as a burden similar to that required in Criminal Law;
4. No person should be deemed by the MCFD at any time to be a permanently irreparable risk to children without sustained and consistent effort by the MCFD to assist that person in becoming otherwise; and
5. A concrete and defined process of mitigation must be available to an accused person at all times during a child protection proceeding.

________________

4.       Child protection “Presentation Hearings” must change as they currently serve no useful practical function.

• As Presentation Hearings are currently reportedly resolved in the favour of the MCFD by default and in over 98% of cases, and serve only to separate families for longer periods before the resolution of judicial proceedings;
• As an accused often does not hear, at a Presentation Hearing, the full nature of the allegations against them, nor evidence;
• As the net result of current practices is the unnecessary removal of children from their parents, and longer removal periods; and
• As the principles of fundamental justice should not be suspended in child protection hearings:

1. Presentation Hearings must be abolished and Protection Hearings moved forwards such that a Protection Hearing must be commenced within 30 days of a child’s apprehension under the CFCSA.
2. Alternately,
       i.      Presentation Hearings must be such that the onus of burden of proof is upon the MCFD and not resolved in the MCFD’s favour by default;
       ii.      The MCFD must submit all relevant documents to be used at a Presentation Hearing at least a week in advance, with tactics such as delivering paperwork on the Court steps just before the Presentation Hearing to be prohibited;
       iii.      Child protection concerns must be specifically stated at the time of the Presentation Hearing;
       iv.      The evidence for the concerns, as well as the context for the evidence (e.g. assessed credibility) must be presented at the time of the Presentation Hearing;
       v.      Any concerns not of a proven nature (i.e. bare allegation) must be fully stated as such at the time of the Presentation Hearing;
      vi.      Any concerns not of a proven nature (i.e. bare allegation) be accompanied by a definite and reasonable plan by the MCFD as to how they propose to substantiate or disprove the allegations; and
     vii.      The burden of proof the MCFD must meet to remove a child prior to the completion of Court proceedings must be based on the probability that harm would occur to a child within the timespan needed for a trial - not the probability that harm might occur before the child reaches the age of 19.

________________

5.       Legal Aid or assistance must be made available to all families and adults, regardless of income, in child protection matters.

• As the nature of child protection proceedings have extreme impacts upon a family and are often lengthy and may result in even well-off families becoming bankrupted, indebted, or even having to withdraw from child protection proceedings for financial reasons, all of which would foreseeably cause harm to a child;
• As financial impacts may preclude a person or family from utilizing their right to Judicial review; and
• As it is in the best interests of the child for their parents to be meaningfully represented in child protection hearings:

1. Legal Aid should be extended to all families, regardless of income, for matters brought by the MCFD or which pertain to matters of child protection;
2. Legal Aid should extended to all families, regardless of income, for Appeals or further proceedings stemming from matters brought by the MCFD or which pertain to matters of child protection; and
3. For parties who refuse Legal Aid, a partial rebate of legal costs should be paid by the Government.

________________

6.       The MCFD must ensure the basic right of children to be heard, as set out by the United Nations’ Convention of the Rights of the Child and its three Optional Protocols, which has been ratified by Canada.

• As children deserve a right to be heard (a right enshrined in Article 12(2) of the United Nations Rights of the Child Convention and its three Optional Protocols, which  directs that children be given the opportunity to be heard in “any” proceedings affecting them);
• As Canada is a signatory of the UN Rights of the Child Convention, and those rights therein and both binding upon Canada and paramount above even the Canadian Charter; and
• As children are frequently completely unrepresented and unheard in Court in child protection proceedings:

1. All children, regardless of age, should be given status of Party in all child protection proceedings;
2. b.      All children under the age of 16 should be automatically provided with a Voice of the Child or similar professional, at the cost of the Government, in order that their opinions be accurately represented and properly weighed by the Courts;
3. All children, regardless of age, must be automatically represented by qualified legal Counsel, at the cost of the Government;
4. The legal Counsel of a child must be appointed by an entity independent of the MCFD;
5. The legal Counsel of a child must not be beholden to the MCFD in any way, in order to avoid the child's voice being co-opted for gain.

________________

7.       The MCFD must ensure children’s legal rights in care.

• As children’s rights are legally set out as rights in the CFCSA; and
• As the definition of a right is that which is unequivocal, universal, unalienable and irrevocable:

1. The s.70 rights laid out in the CFCSA must be mandatory and binding upon all MCFD staff in dealings with CFCSA matters regarding children of all ages;
2. Breaches of those s.70 rights must be prohibited under all circumstances, except for the right to be told about their rights, which are instead to be mandatory for all children of school age;
3. The MCFD must be mandated to bring all such breaches to the attention of the Watchdog;
4. The Watchdog must be mandated to report to the Representative for Children and Youth (“RCY”);
5. The RCY must be mandated to bring all such breaches to the Human Rights Tribunal;
6. There must be swift and firm administrative consequences to MCFD staff for breaching rights, and that these consequences must be mandatory and similar in nature to consequences and processes followed in matters of human rights violations of other Government agencies.

________________

8.       The MCFD must ensure that legislated timelines and deadlines are reasonable and respected.

• As the timelines and deadlines set out in the CFCSA are often disregarded, to the detriment of a child’s relations with their parents or caregivers;
• As MCFD workers and Counsel have been known to “weaponise” evidence disclosure, for example incomplete disclosure or disclosure with little or no notice; and
• As the primary aim of child protection hearings must be to ensure the best interests of the child, rather than to indulge in tactical horseplay to the detriment of a full and fair hearing:

1. The MCFD must be strictly mandated to abide by all timelines and deadlines set out in the CFCSA;
2. Mandatory investigation and set administrative penalties must be instituted for those who fail to abide by them; and
3. Exceeding a timeline regarding the maximum time a child may be apprehended must result in the immediate return of the child to the parent apparently entitled to custody.

________________

9.       The MCFD must completely address the concerns and recommendations of the “Plecas Report”.

• As the MCFD have not completely addressed recommendations laid out in the Plecas Report; and
• As the MCFD have been reported to have had little interest in doing so in a timely manner:

1. The directions and recommendations laid out in the Plecas Report must be made binding upon the MCFD to address within a reasonable timeline;
2. The directions and recommendations must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Watchdog; and
3. Senior MCFD employees must be designated accountable for any failures to meet timelines or to satisfactorily address the directions and recommendations of the Plecas Report.

________________

10.   MCFD employees must be consistently held accountable for unethical or illegal actions.

• As MCFD staff can face no visible penalty for infringing, disregarding, or violating the CFCSA, and
• As the current MCFD Complaints Division is often unable to act in such matters, or may issue decisions which are non-binding or result in little or no firm action:

1. All MCFD Social Workers must be registered with the BC College of Social Workers, and held to the same ethical and practical standards of all accredited Social Workers;
2. The Watchdog must be empowered and mandated to act on any complaints regarding infractions of the CFCSA;
3. MCFD staff members must be responsible for upholding those rights and be held administratively or legally accountable for any failures to abide by the letter of the CFCSA;
4. The details of all infractions and subsequent decisions and administrative consequences must be:

                       i.      Communicated to the complainant;

                      ii.      Made publically available, and

                     iii.      Communicated to the Watchdog.

________________

11.   The MCFD Complaints system in its current state is broken and must change.

• As the current MCFD Complaints system is restricted in key areas, for example, from reviewing clinical decisions of MCFD Social Workers, or from ordering the replacement of a Social Worker on a case;
• As the MCFD Complaints system offers little protection against retaliation to individuals or families by MCFD Social Workers for making a complaint;
• As the MCFD Complaints system is not truly independent and has little meaningful, timely, and binding independent oversight;
• As the MCFD Complaints system contains logical paradoxes, for example, barring someone who complains of not receiving MCFD services from making a complaint on the grounds that they are not receiving MCFD services; and
• As the MCFD Complaints system often takes many months to complete its work on a single complaint, during which the activity complained about often continues unabated, which can be prejudicial and harmful to families:

1. Administrative Reviews  and Complaints investigations must complete within a period of 3 months maximum, without exception;
2. The MCFD Complaints Department must be empowered to issue binding decisions or change clinical decisions;
3. The MCFD Complaints Department must be obligated to accept all complaints regarding MCFD actions or decisions in a case, regardless of who the complainant may be;
4. The Watchdog should be immediately notified of the details of all complaints, as well as the details of the resolution of the complaint and correspondence sent to the complainant; and
5. The Watchdog should be empowered to order an Administrative Review, Judicial Review, and the re-opening of any closed complaints, at its sole discretion.

________________

12.   The MCFD must ensure transparency and speed in giving parents information about them or their children, and must allow adequate opportunity for those suspected to respond to all allegations made against them.

• As the MCFD often withholds information from a parent unless a lengthy Freedom of Information process is completed, which often takes many months;
• As the information routinely withheld by the MCFD is often relevant and of a timely nature for a parent or child, for example supervised visitation reports; and
• ·As information routinely withheld by the MCFD includes details of child protection concerns, which can result in unfair or harmful impacts such a parent being unable to meaningfully respond to that concern:

1. The MCFD must be mandated to provide all supervised visitation reports without delay to a parent upon request, and without going through a formal Freedom of Information request process;
2. The MCFD must be mandated to provide information to a parent or caregiver about the existence of any child protection concern within a period of about 3 days of that complaint being made;
3. The MCFD must be mandated to provide the basic facts of a child protection concern to a parent or caregiver within a period of about 7 days, in such a manner that a parent or caregiver is able to meaningfully respond to the details of that concern;
4. The MCFD must be mandated to provide parents or caregivers information about how concerns might be addressed or mitigated within 14 about days of a concern being reported.

________________

13.   Racial bias is unfair and illegal in any form and must not form part of child protection decisions.

• Because institutionalized racism or racial bias is fundamentally illegal and unethical in any form;
• While respecting the inherent need for First Nations peoples to receive special considerations; and
• In respecting the need for decisions made regarding a child to be fair and equal:

1. In situations where children have parents who are both of First Nations ancestry, all current financial legal advantage, rights, privileges or powers should continue to be provided as-is;
2. Where children have parents of both First Nations and non-First-Nations heritage, no financial or legal advantage must be provided on the sole basis of race or identity – as this provides unfair advantage to one parent over the other solely on the basis of their racial identity; or
3. Alternately, where children have parents of both First Nations and non-First-Nations heritage, if extra financial or legal advantage, rights, privileges or powers are to be afforded to the First Nations parent, those must be equally afforded to the other parent.

 

________________

14. The MCFD must be liable for physical or mental harms done to innocent adults and children.

• Because no person should be caused undue harm by a Government entity, especially a child;
• Because gratuitous allegations or inadequate child protection investigations are innately highly traumatic, often long-lasting, and their effects can foreseeably result in severe and lasting trauma to both adults and children who are affected;
• Because in the current state, trauma services are only provided to victims of abuse, not victims of false allegations of abuse; and
• In consideration of the generally-recognized lack of availability of prompt, free and effective mental  trauma treatments in British Columbia:

1. In cases where an adult or child demonstrates mental or physical illness has occurred as a result of MCFD interventions for child protection allegations which are later proven false, the MCFD must be liable; and
2. In such cases, the MCFD must be obliged to provide and pay for reasonable medical services, in the same manner as the CVAP program currently does for child victims of abuse.