Hong Kong couple

Hung-Kwan Yuen and Anna Zhang caught in Richmond en route to Hong Kong

PAPA People Assisting Parents Association © 2007

Home	Purposes & Services	FAQ	Archives & Links	e Donation & Survey	Contact Us
Members Only	MCFD Tactics	Forum & Testimonies	Parent Support	Kid's Zone	On-Line Services

Hong Kong couple Hung-Kwan Yuen and Anna Zhang from Toronto arrested for kidnapping their own children in Richmond, B.C. on 25 October 2009

The following is the consolidated synopsis of this case translated from the web site version of 26 and 27 October 2009 Ming Pao Daily Newspaper (Vancouver, Canada).

Catholic Children's Aid Society in Scarborough, Toronto, Canada (Photo credit: Ming Pao News)

A Chinese couple immigrated from Hong Kong were arrested by the RCMP in Richmond, British Columbia for kidnapping their own children in Scarborough, Ontario (part of Greater Toronto). All their four children are in government care. Two of them are about to be adopted and will not be allowed to see their parents again. The parents took their "sold" children in the last supervised visit. The police believes that they plan to take them back to Hong Kong en route Vancouver. On October 26, 2009, Mr. Hung-Kwan Yuen the father (age 75 at the time when this incident occurred ) and Anna Zhang the mother (age 34) were arraigned in the Provincial Court in Richmond and will be charged in Toronto.

The couple lost the permanent custody of all their four children (including their new born infant) when court ruled that the parents did not provide sufficient care. Since the oldest child is only 6-year old, their names will not be released. Detective Jim Giczi of the 42nd Precinct said that the parents are allowed to have supervised access on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Furthermore, they have two hours of unsupervised access on Saturday.

According to a friend who knows the couple well, Mr. and Mrs. Yuen had received university education in China and Australia respectively. Both can speak fluent English. The parents never physically or verbally discipline their children. The family lives in an apartment suite at 100 Wingarden Court. However, their children often appear untidy and dirty. Their clothes are filthy and there is food scrap on their face at times. Staff in day care centre had denied their entry and demanded that they be cleansed up. This friend strongly disagrees that their children have been abused. He has never seen the couple argue and have not seen any unexplained injury on the children. They always appear happy, show no sign of withdrawal or fear. Their only problem appears to be their untidy home, filthy attire and poor personal hygiene, which had attracted the attention of Ontario's child protection agency. He said that the parents spent $3,000 to install a water softening device to provide better drinking water to their children.

Detective Jim Giczi of the 42nd Precinct (photo credit: Ming Pao News)

Before government intervention, they had three children. Catholic-run child aid society (CAS, Ontario provincial government's "child protection" apparatus) has forced the parents to go through psychological assessment and to attend parenting skill improvement workshop. For the sake of their children, Mr. and Mrs. Yuen are willing to do everything CAS demands. They bought a new mini van to replace their old filthy family car and tidied up their home with new furniture. The parents have also made substantial improvement on their own attire. At this time their fourth child arrived. Despite their effort to meet the demands imposed on them, CAS is still not satisfied and removed their new born infant shortly after birth.

On October 24, 2009, their children are supposed to be returned to the CAS at 1880 Birchmount Road, Scarborough. CAS staff called the police when the children did not return after the two-hour unsupervised access was overdue. The parents were transported by a third party in a silver grey van to CAS when picking up the children. The foster parent always take the children to meet their parents in CAS. The address of the foster home is never made known to the parents.

The parents will be taken back to Toronto to face two counts of kidnapping charges. The police said that parents kidnapping their own children case is uncommon. The last time it happened was two years ago.

B.C. Minister of Children and Family Development (MCFD) Mary Polak said that she knew little about this case and was unable to comment. She alleged that the safety of children is of paramount importance. Although MCFD is happy to see family reunited, some children need to be away from their family permanently. MCFD will first consider their next of kin like grandparents, uncle and auntie.

This case demonstrates the following:

the inhumane nature of state-sponsored child removals in which family members are forced to separate, family ties severed, adopted out to total strangers and will not be allowed to see one another again;
if the information provided by the friend of the Yuen family is accurate and complete, subjective judgment on personal hygiene, attire and home tidiness can become legal ground to remove children from their families up to the extent of adopting them out (of course, it is unlikely that CAS will release any information on this high profile case citing privacy protection of the children and hence keeping the public guessing in the dark);
there is strong sense of cultural assimilation as the standard in personal hygiene, attire and home tidiness is different from person to person, let alone in different cultures;
the tax dollars wasted on buying the "services" of foster parents, supervised workers, "child protection" social workers, shrinks, lawyers who are the true beneficiaries of the child removal industry produce state-created trauma;
"child protection" agency (CAS and MCFD alike) frequently use the police when doing its child removal business (see the Misha Peterson case who was Tasered by the Vancouver City Police in 2008);
taking removed children to another province does not help the parents at all, on the contrary, this will create more legal problems to them;
despite whether state-sponsored child removal is carried out by a provincial ministry (like MCFD in B.C.) or a designated non-profit society (like CAS in Ontario), parents are forced to jump the hoops, live in fear of losing their children because some self-righteous god-like creatures have a "child protection" concerns and fight a very lopsided legal battle in a corrupted system against a formidable absolute power;
people plan to immigrate to Canada or to other English-speaking countries with similar "child protection" law should be aware of the risk on their children inadvertently adhered to their immigration decision;
Renee Terrell and her infant son, Saige were captured on 19 October 2006

parents oppressed by "child protection" services are often forced to take illegal approach to protect their loved ones and keep their family together (see another similar case: the killing of Social Worker Boni Frederick in Henderson, Kentucky allegedly by a mother Renee Terrell during the last supervised visit with her removed child before adoption in October 2006, we condemn violence against any person and do not condone martyrizing any members of special interest groups as this will only give them excuse to further expand their power);
children are traumatized and victimized by state intervention.

While members of the special interest groups in the "child protection" industry are removing children for money and job security, the parents took the risk of committing a crime to protect their loved ones and keeping the family intact. Who is more likely to provide better care to the children? If King Solomon is going to rule on this case, the final verdict would have been very different.

It is noteworthy to mention that:

Mainstream media does not appear to have covered much of this story. The only coverage found is from the Canadian Press "Parents in custody after alleged attempt to flee with children"
Unlike what B.C. Minister of Children and Family Development Mary Polak claimed, empirical evidence suggests that many removed children are not placed under the care of their next of kin.
If MCFD is happy to see family reunited, why separate them to begin with?
Like the notorious Native Indian residential school (please read our Native Indians & MCFD page for more information on this topic), this state-created atrocity is possible because government has the authority to remove children from their families.
Like all MCFD offices in British Columbia, CAS office at 1880 Birchmount Road, Scarborough (see the photo at the top left hand corner) is highly secured. If these so-called "child protection" agencies are really helping families in need, why do their office needs such high security?
If poor personal hygiene and home untidiness can become legal grounds of child removal, many Canadian parents with children under age 19 are a phone call away from losing their children to their government. Do you want your government to have this power?
Almost all immigrants come to Canada to pursue a better and safer future, especially for their children. Government intervention in the Yuen's family has probably shattered their hope of a better life in Canada. The fact that they decided to leave speaks to this effect. This barbaric and inhumane "child protection" law will destroy the international image of Canada and will deter immigrants from coming to this country. Not all Canadians welcome new immigrants. Most of us, especially politicians, welcome the money that new immigrants bring that will help create employment and generate tax revenue. Reduced influx of good quality immigrants will become a collateral damage of our oppressive "child protection" law.

References

[This page was added on added on 26 October 2009 and revised on 5 November 2011.]