Archive for January, 2010

29
Jan
10

Time Slips By

Friday, January 29, 2010

For Love and For Justice / Part 95 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

LOVE

Zabeth and Paul visit their three children on two afternoons each week. All three children are now in the same foster home. On those two afternoons, Paul and Zabeth have three hours in which to hug and love and play and pray and read and tell stories to their children. The children have not been permitted to be with their own parents in their own family home for twenty-seven months.

Mommy and Daddy take occasional photos of their family visits. During the other 162 hours of each week, those photos are the only physical evidence they have that their children exist. Some of their pictures make them laugh. Some show the family cuddling. Sometimes the photos simply cause Zabeth and Paul to pause and grasp the reality that so much time has slipped away. Tears come when comparing current shots with some pre-crisis photos. Little Bethany is a toddler now. She was six weeks old when the Ministry of Children and Family Development took her. She was a newborn. Zabeth was nursing her.

Source:

http://ronunruhgps.blogspot.com/2010/01/for-love-and-for-justice-part-95-zabeth.html

Advertisements
29
Jan
10

For Shattered Families

Thursday, January 28, 2010

For Love and For Justice / Part 94 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne


An original song entitled ‘Justice’ written by Tom Simanek and Rob Elliott is performed by Rob Elliott in dedication to the struggle to reunite families that have been shattered by the family courts. A video using this song’s lyrics has been prepared by Linda McDermott, Dave Ellison, Shaun O’Connell, Layton Bevan and Julia Langmaid. You can listen and watch this on YouTube at this link. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkWQDWnsyfw

Justice

The race-car bed is empty,
no toys are on the floor,
not many changes you can see…
but Johnny doesn’t live here,
doesn’t live here any more…
never coming through that door.

Feel what I feel
my heart bleeds…
Show me mercy,
hear me plead…
Give me justice,
give me justice,
It’s what I need.

A scrap of legal paper,
an expert testifies,
the child you love is taken…
but justice doesn’t live here,
doesn’t live here, it’s a lie…
nothing you can do but cry.

Feel what I feel
my heart bleeds…
Show me mercy,
hear me plead…
Give me justice,
give me justice,
It’s what I need.

A judgement not of Solomon,
no wisdom in the words,
and after all is said and done…
your Johnny doesn’t live here,
doesn’t live here and what’s worse…
nothing lives here but the hurt.
Nothing lives here but the hurt.

Feel what I feel
my heart bleeds…
Show me mercy,
hear me plead…
Give me justice,
give me justice,
It’s what I need.

copyright 2009 Simanek/Elliott

Source:

http://ronunruhgps.blogspot.com/2010/01/for-love-and-for-justice-part-94-zabeth.html

29
Jan
10

A Family Of Five Minus Three

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

For Love and For Justice / Part 93 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne


This is a family of five. It is not the Bayne family. It is however, the way the Baynes dream of living, hand in hand, happy, together, walking away from a nightmare.

Paul and Zabeth are road warriors already. After all it has been two years and three months that they have been deprived of their children. You read that length of time correctly. Their youngest child, Bethany was two months old when she was removed from her home and from her parents’ custody and care. That inordinate length of time will factor surely into the case their attorney makes against B.C.’s Ministry of Children and Family Development. Some within the Ministry assume a level of authority beyond even the seeming excessive power that has been granted to the Ministry in order to protect children. It will be shown that the Ministry has strided far past its generous permissions in its hard treatment of the Baynes.

Paul and Zabeth have steeled themselves to the indignities they suffer on a weekly basis so that they will not jeopardize the little amount of time that they are permitted to have with their own children. They have to be so careful. Their time with the children, three hours on each of two afternoons per week, is closely scrutinized. This scrutiny comes from the person who drives the vehicle that transports the children. This driver is not a Ministry employee but works for an independent company which is contracted by the Ministry. The driver makes notes throughout the three hours while watching the five Baynes play, pray, sing, laugh, embrace. The driver has been carefully instructed to record conduct and behaviour of parents with children, attitude, comments made. These notes will be provided to the Ministry for their file on these parents. This driver employee polices the Bayne parents by censuring harmless actions or activities under threat that non compliance will result in removal of visitation privilege.

An example occurred this past week and the Baynes have sent a letter of complaint to Kimberly Grey MCF/EX. They wrote, “We have just left the visitation with our children and while we were saying goodbye our children made a hand sign at us again, which we returned. The driver (not named here) quickly stated “no, if you do that the visits will be stopped.” There have been numerous other unwarranted and unnecessary restrictions imposed upon the Baynes over many months. During the first days of this court case MCFD employee Berhe Gulbot was questioned by Bayne lawyer Doug Christie with regard to these restrictions. Berhe Gulbot agreed in cross examination that these were not Ministry policy and that they would be unreasonable. The Baynes wrote in this written letter, “If these restrictions are a direct instruction from the Ministry I then request that you submit a list to us to refer to, but if Berhe Gulbot’s testimony on cross examination was correct then these restrictions are not Ministry policy and are unreasonable and therefore we should not consider them a threat to the continuation of our visitations.” BRAVO!

This court case is active. Court sessions have been scheduled allowing for breaks. The next series of Court Days are scheduled for February 2-5 at the Chilliwack Court House.

Source:

http://ronunruhgps.blogspot.com/2010/01/for-love-and-for-justice-part-93-zabeth.html

27
Jan
10

Still A Broken Family

Tuesday, January 26, 2010

For Love and For Justice / Part 92 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne

Life is too precious.

My own life is almost spent. Sure I may have many years to live. Yet my energetic working years are done. The strong blond man of my high school and college years lives only in pictures seldom viewed by anyone. My children now in their own mid years don’t remember me in my youth. In their minds they have only grown accustomed to the ‘me’ with escalating limitations. Their children will always know me ‘old.’ Grandpa I am.

I am not complaining. This is life. It’s good. There are large measures of joy and satisfaction attached to this personal definition of life in Canada.

That’s why the wounded lives of Paul and Zabeth Bayne and their children Kent, Baden and Bethany trouble me so much. That’s why the Court Case, the result of which will determine whether the children can come back to their parents or whether they must be forced to become adopted children to adoptive parents, is one of the most important events in B.C. right now. It is only one family of course. However, this single case forecasts the likelihood of an overhaul of the structure, protocol, personnel and policies of this beleaguered child protection agency. It is unthinkable that the Judge’s conclusion might greenlight further injustices to more innocent parents and children as zeal and power without wisdom decides the lives of citizens.

The Baynes should not be enduring this broken family unit, the financial ruin, the daily tears, the eyes of three children filled with worry and doubt about so many things that should not harass a child in Canada.

Justice needs to be served on a silver platter to this family so that what remains of three children’s formative years will be spent in the affectionate and daily embrace of parents who love them so tenaciously that they will plead ardently until the custody of their children is restored to them. They will also unceasingly declare their innocence. Innocent, they will never admit to a guilt that is implied by a two year old medical diagnosis of baby Bethany with which a long list of medical professionals dispute. This court case, painfully lengthy, will validate the Baynes as worthy parents who have suffered an incalculably horrific two and a half year travesty of human rights, freedom and justice.

Source:

http://ronunruhgps.blogspot.com/2010/01/for-love-and-for-justice-part-92-zabeth.html

25
Jan
10

Understanding Or Declaration Of War

Sunday, January 24, 2010

For Love and For Justice / Part 91 / Zabeth and Paul Bayne


The trial is scheduled to last sixteen days and these days are to stretch through January and February. The first three court days were held on Wednesday 12th , Thursday 13th and Friday 15th . The focus of the early days of the court case have been upon the testimonies of social workers and the regional Director for this case. That is precisely how it came down.

The Baynes’ demand for their children has been a public and high profile claim particularly during the past year. Global and CBC news networks have done stories on the Baynes’ contest with the Ministry of Children and Family Development. The Baynes themselves have maintained an online presence through websites and Facebook pages. People like me have easily recognized the injustices within this case and have sought to explain facts, some of us doing it objectively and others expressing objectionable opinions. Always the Baynes have asserted that MCFD’s legitimate task of protecting children was based on a wrong medical diagnosis and then a series of skewed MCFD decisions not in the interest of the Bayne family but in the interest of building a case for MCFD’s seizure and custody of three Bayne children. Little effort was made by MCFD to truly know Paul and Zabeth, their characters, principles and values and family commitments. The Baynes’ vigorous and persistent fight for their children over the two and one half years of this torment was perceived by MCFD as a declaration of war rather than being seen through the understanding eyes of social workers with authentic sensitivity to humanity. I am sorry to have witnessed that. I am appalled that this flaw appears to be a common feature in child protection networks across our country, in every province, in the UK and in Australia. Do some googling and you will soon be confronted by an avalanche of worrisome reports about insensitive and inept case handling and worse, incarceration of parents falsely accused.

Ministry of Children and Family Development attorney, early in the court proceedings, applied for a ban on all publicity and news coverage. During a 15 minute presentation, Bayne’s lawyer Doug Christie ardently opposed this application, arguing for the public’s right to be informed about a case as significant as this and about a Ministry that is charged by the public to fulfill its responsibilities. Christie contended that the media has a right to participate, report and defend its reported accounts. He further stated that it would be inappropriate for the Judge to make a decision on this application within fifteen minutes of hearing the application. The judge then adjourned for 30 minutes and upon his return indicated that he would not so soon approve the application for the ban because it might affect this case and others that would follow this one. If the MCFD intended to pursue the ban application, then the media must also be allowed to defend its position. MCFD attorney Finn Jensen then told the court that he would not proceed with the application. So this was dismissed. In truth this may result in better accountability through public exposure.

CBC ran a story on the opening day of this court case and that content was sympathetic to the Baynes’ claim that the children should be returned to them.

Monday, January 25, 2010

Addendum to the 91st

The Schedule for Court Days is as follows:
Feb 2 -5; Feb 8 – 9; Feb 11-12; Feb 22-23; Feb 25-26
You are welcome to attend, to hear the witnesses’ testimonies, the cross examinations, and to be an encouragement to the Baynes by your presence at the Chilliwack Court House.

Monday, January 25, 2010

2nd Addendum to the 91st

A very informative website has been established documenting the Bayne PLEA FOR JUSTICE / The Plight of Paul and Zabeth Bayne

Source:

http://ronunruhgps.blogspot.com/2010/01/for-love-and-for-justice-part-91-zabeth.html

24
Jan
10

Global TV – Bayne Family

This video is the second part of a 2-part series on the Bayne’s case made by Global TV (a Vancouver, B.C., Canada TV station). This video was aired on Global TV, May 20, 2008. Before this news was aired, the parents had a signed mediation agreement with the Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) on May 16, 2008 obliging the return of the two older children to the parents under a supervision order.

After the news was aired, this agreement was unilaterally canceled by MCFD alleging a breach of trust by going public. All the Bayne children were removed shortly after they were returned. The mother lost her job because MCFD told her employer about the child protection concern. Due to the loss of income, they failed to pay the mortgage and lost their family home. The parents are now working as night janitors so that they could see their children during the day.

24
Jan
10

Shaken Baby Protest – Fairchild TV

(English translation is available at the end of http://www.pa-pa.ca/Bayne.html) A Surrey couple launched a peaceful protest outside B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell’s Vancouver constituency office seeking a trial on the removal of their 3 children in October 2007. Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFD) alleged that their youngest daughter had been physically abused (Shaken Baby Syndrome) of the 6-week old infant. In June 2008, they went public to Global TV after MCFD returned their older boys under supervision order. Several weeks later, social workers from MCFD went to their home and removed the boys again during their birthday party. Lawyer representing MCFD told the parents that this is a “control” issue and the parents should know what that means.

It is scary to see that a government ministry with a mandate to protect children and develop families in need would abuse its authority and retaliate when parents go public to air their case. This happened in a place where its government describes as “the best place on Earth”. The authority to remove children under the pretext of “child protection” seriously challenges our long-cherished human rights, civil liberty and natural justice.

To view more child removal cases, please browse:

http://www.pa-pa.ca/cases.html