Children's Aid Society Oversight

PAPA People Assisting Parents Association

© 2007-now
Bookmark and Share
donate button
PAPA logo
notice board blogger icon
New links

At about 10:07 p.m. on March 22, 2010, an anonymous browser from Duncan sent the message below twice within one minute and hoped that we will post his comments in our site. Generally, we do not publish profane statements. However, to show our respect to viewers with different opinions, his wish has been granted.

This sender used our survey form to deliver his message. Since no personal identifiable information has been provided, we publish his entire message followed by our rebuttal and an anecdote of a real child removal case in Duncan.

The Original Unedited Message

sex: male
age: 28
citizenship: Canadian
occupation: others
ethnic origin: Caucasian
children: 0
language: English
religion: atheist/none
hear from: word of mouth
search engine: Google
constitutional right: yes
ease of use: very easy
focus: not focused
overall rating: poor
surname: (not provided)
name: (not provided)
address: (not provided)
city: (not provided)
province: (not provided)
phone: (not provided)
email: (not provided)

this website, is the most bullshit thing, i have ever read. your views and videos are slanderous and your website should be shut down. there is no facts on this website, about anything that happens within the MCFD. surveillance of parents is against the law, but you wouldn\'t know that, you don\'t practice law, you practice medicine. have you ever worked with children outside of medicine? probably not, so i dont believe you are the right person to be \"helping people.\" i hope you post this on your shithole website, so that other people can have a good laugh.

Our Rebuttal

His first line is a profane conclusion unsubstantiated by any fact or empirical data. He further concluded that our views and videos are slanderous and our site should be shut down. Our remarks to this comment are as follows:

  1. Our views contained in our web site are all written and broadcast in published words. If we indeed knowingly made false and defamatory written communications and stating them as facts, it is known as libel, not slander. Technically, he erred. Furthermore, our views are opinions made in a good faith supported by credible testimonies, empirical results, compelling reasons and beliefs that they are true on a matter of public interest.
  2. Videos archived in our web site were not made by us. Most of them are news footage produced by reputable media. They were made by other unrelated parties all over the world. We simply link them.

We believe in freedom of speech within the parameter of law. If this browser thinks that we have committed libel, perhaps he could enlighten us with more specific information such as what he thinks is libelous, on what actionable grounds, against whom and their actual injury. If this browser cares to identify himself, we would like to have an open debate with him or to litigate his claims in a court of law.

This browser further stated that there is no facts on our website and anything that happens within the MCFD. It implies the following:

  1. all information contained in our web site, including information published by the government, is false; and
  2. he knows a lot of what are happening within the MCFD suggesting that he is either a MCFD employee or someone who closely associates with the Ministry.

The only point that we agree with this browser is his statement that surveillance on parents is against the law. That said, we are unaware that such surveillance activities have ever been investigated, let alone prosecuted and punished, by the authorities. How do we know that MCFD conducts surveillance on parents? Because many oppressed parents had encountered this personally during their persecution and they had shared their experience with us supported by good evidence. Furthermore, Mr. Tom Christensen, former Minister of Children and Family Development, told us in person that he is aware of surveillance conducted on parents.

This browser then said: “you don\'t practice law, you practice medicine. have you ever worked with children outside of medicine? probably not, so i dont believe you are the right person to be \"helping people.\" We find it quite inconceivable how the practice of law and medicine has anything to do with our cause. “Children outside of medicine” is not a proper expression that any reasonable person would understand its meaning in this context. It appears this browser believes that we cannot help people because we do not practice law or medicine.

People will indeed have a good laugh when they read this posting. But reasonable people would only laugh at this browser, not us. In addition to his absurdity and poor judgment skills proven in his remarks, there are plenty of profanity and mistakes in both grammar and punctuation. It is indeed laughable when a person wrote a comment of this quality and asked us to post it to reveal his ignorance and stupidity.

Unless personally offended or perceived to be affected by our web site, few people would react so strongly and disrespectful. Imagine if people of this caliber is given the statutory power to remove children from their parents at will, what could happen to society, families and children? We shudder at the thought.

We hope that supporters of special interests in the “child protection” industry would send someone better when they attack us next time.

An Anecdote of a Real Child Removal Case in Duncan

Speaking of Duncan in Vancouver Island, British Columbia, we have obtained permission from a mother from this town who had the painful experience of having her children removed. In such a small community, the browser from Duncan who sent the above message may have knowledge of this case. We would like to share the details so that people in that community are more informed of how state-sponsored child removal impacts families.

I was going through a difficult separation after a long, abusive relationship with a man who finally told me he was gay. I asked him to move out and he wouldn’t. His whole family was being abusive towards me and my children.

My ex-mother-in-law physically assaulted me in front of my children one day so I decided it was time to take action. I went to a safe house thinking that they would be able to help me relocate to a city close by just to put some distance between me and my ex-family. After arriving at the safe house, my ex-husband called police and told them I had ran away with the children and was crazy enough to murder them. The Ministry of Children and Families came to interview me and the children at the safe house. I was locked in for twenty-three days. I was not allowed to leave with the children. I was not allowed to enroll them in school or anything and it was later used against me in court that my children did not attend school for those twenty-three days.

My ex-husband had always told me that if I tried to leave I would never see the children again but I thought of it as an idle threat. He said he had a friend who was a judge that would see to it that I never saw them again. I didn’t know at the time, but he also had a sister who worked for the Ministry of Children and Families as a child protection social worker.

We left the safe house when MCFD finally ended their investigation and were going to move into a three bedroom apartment but a few days later, I had a seizure while walking downtown with my youngest child. I was taken to emergency where social workers involved in my case had discussions with the doctor. They told him that I was drug addicted and had muchausins disease and was probably not sick at all. I was released from the hospital only to return in the early morning hours to have major, emergency surgery to remove my gallbladder and stones blocking my liver and intestines…something the doctor may have found earlier if social workers had not intervened. My liver and pancreas were so swollen that a specialist had to get involved.

The children were removed the night of the surgery and given to my ex-husband. I never got a protection hearing or any trial at all. Custody was given to my ex-husband a month later without any court proceedings. Seven years later, my children have still not been returned to my care.

I was forced to have supervised access due to allegations that I was a drug addict suffering from ‘munchausins’ disease and that I was mentally unstable. Although my ex-husband made these allegations, he never had any proof and never once took the stand in a courtroom. He rarely ever lived up to the court ordered access agreements and I hardly ever saw my children for the first three years. My ex-husband constantly told the children negative things about me and tried very hard to turn them against me. To this day one of them does not talk to me.


back to the "Browser's Response" page

Browser's Response


[This page was added on 3 April 2010.]