PAPA People Assisting Parents Association

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

On 14 July 2015, the Supreme Court of B.C. handed down an unprecedented judgment J.P. v. British Columbia (Children and Family Development), 2015 BCSC 1216. This is the first case in Canadian legal history in which child protection workers are found liable for misfeasance in public office, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of the standard of care. Findings therein confirm our views and support the merit of our cause. Continuous litigations between JP and the MCFD are summarized in JP Aftermath. Our commentary on the Plecas Review Part 1: Decision Time was published on 4 January 2016. If you have evidence of misfeasance or abuse of children in foster care, please come forward and contact us.
Our site contains vast amount of information on child protective services (CPS). Please hover your mouse over the navigation icons below to access the most frequently sought information by various categories of browsers.
parents must read
  1. MCFD Tactics
  2. MCFD Surveillance
  3. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  4. Psychotherapy
  5. Flaws of CFCSA
  6. Absolute Power and Corruption
  7. Myths & Reality
  8. On-line Service Application
Media
  1. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  2. MCFD Tactics
  3. MCFD Surveillance
  4. MCFD & The First Nation
  5. Unreported Deaths of Albertan Foster Children
  6. Child Removal and Human Organ Harvesting
  7. Empirical and Statistical Data
  8. Child Removal Cases
  9. Video Archives
contact us
most popular
  1. MCFD found liable for misfeasance
  2. MCFD & The First Nation
  3. The Child Protection Industry
  4. Unreported Deaths of Albertan Foster Children
  5. Our Comment on "When Talk Trumped Service"
  6. "The problem with Children’s Aid Societies" by Barbara Kay for National Post
  7. Powerful As God (2011 documentary)
  8. CPS Quotas: How Child Protective Services is Incentivized To Take Children video
  9. Documentary on the Child Protection Industry
  10. "The Child Abuse Laws Which Could Destroy Your Reputation"
  11. 3-part WLKY Target 32 Investigates (Kentucky, U.S.A.):
    1. "CPS Makes Shocking Allegations at 2 Moms Part 1 of 3"
    2. "CPS Does About Face, Accuses Parents Of Abuse Part 2 of 3"
    3. "CPS Makes More Disturbing Allegations Against Parents Part 3 of 3"
  12. "Child Protective System WLKY Louisville Part 1"; and
    "Child Protective System WLKY Louisville Part 2"
  13. Documentary on the Ministry of Children and Family Development Part 1 and Part 2
  14. "The Negative Effects of Foster Care on Removed Children" (Wikipedia)
  15. "Mass CPS corruption Part 2"
  16. "Deconstructing America Part 1" "Deconstructing America Part 2"
  17. "Death of a foster child Dontel Jeffers, Dorchester, Massachusetts, U.S.A. (Part 1)" "(Part 2)" ABC News
  18. U.S. Republican Senator Nancy Schaefer spoke on "child protective service" (CPS) corruption video
  19. "Children's Aid Society workers should be reined in" National Post
  20. Wrongful Removal of Christina Harrison's Baby
  21. Jessica Laboy case
  22. Removal of the 13 Gates Children in Texas, U.S.A.
  23. "Married to the State: How government colonizes the family"
    by Professor Stephen Baskerville (September 2009)
Hover your mouse to pause the slide show and to view photo description.

A Glorified Child Abuse Case: Toya Graham of Baltimore

Video footage of Freddie Gray's arrest and Dante Parker's death in custody

Background

In 2014 to 2015, several unarmed black Americans, some were young children, were killed by white policemen in unjustified circumstances. More prominent cases among these are Dante Parker (36, San Bernardino County, California killed on 12 August 2014), Michael Brown (18, Ferguson, Missouri killed on 9 August 2014) and Tamir Rice (12, Cleveland, Ohio killed on 22 November 2014). It led to demonstrations and riots in various U.S. cities. The incident in this case is caused by the sudden death of Freddie Gray shortly after taken into custody by Baltimore police on 12 April 2015. Despite that the State Attorney’s Office filed charges against the six police officers after a medical examiner’s report that ruled Gray’s death a homicide was published, protests and civil disorder persist. Baltimore's mayor announced citywide curfew from 10:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m. School trips were canceled until mid-May.

A Baltimore resident 16-year old Michael Singleton, son of Toya Graham (a single mother of six children), took part in a riot and threw rocks into a crowd of Baltimore cops. The African-American mom slapped and pulled her teenage son out of the protest in April 2015. Her violent discipline was captured on video. Unlike many corporal punishments, her disciplinary action has attracted wide commendation for in saving her son from putting himself in a vulnerable, possibly life threatening, position that would have led him down the wrong path. Be mindful that there is a suggestion that young black men, like Graham’s son, are 21 times more likely than young white men to be shot dead by police in America (see the sixth paragraph of Dear White America: Toya Graham Is Not Your Hero by Julia Craven, Huffington Post on 29 April 2015).

Is Toya Graham a tough loving mother or a blatant child abuser?

We will not comment on the propriety of her action in the surrounding circumstances. This incident draws our attention because Graham’s disciplinary method would bring child protection service (CPS) officials to her door in a normal scenario. Presuming all her children are under protection age, six kids in one case are lucrative to the child protection industry (the industry unless otherwise states). Two days after the son hitting video went viral, her nightmare with CPS began. On 30 April 2015, CPS in Baltimore has launched an investigation on Toya Graham. CPS alleged that they cannot allow a young man to suffer such violence and abuse, regardless of the cause. They will conduct an investigation that will determine if Ms. Graham will be allowed to continue being her children’s legal guardian.

SW and police in action The photo above was taken when Gestapo-like child protection workers (in plainclothes) and the police demanding entry of a B.C. residence without warrant in July 2011.
If you find the foregoing absurd, hear what a turncoat child protection work says

Why Baltimore CPS did not remove her children immediately as they often do in less prominent cases? What are factors CPS will consider before using their fearsome child removal authority? In most jurisdictions in North America, a 16-year old teen is still a child under state protection by law. In British Columbia, the age limit of protection is 19 at the point of writing. There is pressure from the local child protection service providers to raise this limit to 25. This self-serving proposal will further enhance job security and business opportunities in the industry.

By child protection industry's standard, Graham has verbally, mentally and physically abused her child, inflicting serious psychological and physical harm. If this happens in Canada, her action has exceeded the threshold of corporal punishment permitted by Section 43 of our Criminal Code (the so-called spanking law) which will result in assault charge. The video footage is ironclad evidence of her perceived wrongdoings. In a common scenario, parents in English-speaking countries where governments have the general authority to remove children from their parents based on bureaucratic opinions will soon encounter the following:

  1. When CPS is ready to strike, child protection workers will bring a team of police to the residence, with or without warrant, demanding entry to conduct child protection investigation, remove all children under protection age and arrest the parents in question. Alternatively, children could be removed when they are in schools or in day care.
  2. Despite whether there is sufficient evidence to obtain a probable conviction, child protection workers will lobby the Crown or state attorney to lay criminal charges of assault on parents to lend support on child custody applications and to force parents to fight a two-front war in criminal trial and lengthy child protection hearing that could take years to complete.
  3. All children will be placed in foster homes. No or very limited visitations under tight supervision will be given to parents during normal business hours. Many parents end up losing their jobs due to the prolonged absence from work to see their removed children.
  4. If removed children show any signs of disobedience, distress or depression, CPS paid psychiatrists will prescribe strong psychiatric drugs to keep them under control.
  5. Parents will be compelled, either by way of a court order or using visitation of their removed children as pawns, to undertake psychological assessment and anger control counseling from CPS approved and paid service providers. Assessment and counseling sessions are disguise fishing expeditions to hunt for self-incriminating information. Be mindful that there is no confidentiality protection of counseling file in most jurisdiction.
  6. Children will be alienated from their biological parents by lengthy separation and smearing indoctrination from foster parents.
  7. Removed children will be engaged in counseling. Pseudo scientific methods, like drawing test, will be used on young children to support professional opinions on how the CPS alleged child abuse has adversely impact childhood development.
  8. If there are two parents in the family, a wedge will be driven between them to instigate conflicts aiming to bring separation and subsequently divorce. Using their children as pawns, a family could become dysfunctional in a short time. This is a scenario in which court is more likely to rule in favor of child protection agency.
  9. Parents, if they are not on legal aid, will be milked dry by their lawyers in no time.
  10. Under the pretext of child protection, children are traumatized, parents are plundered and families are ruthlessly destroyed during the aforesaid process. Service providers are the only true beneficiaries. Taxpayers and society are always an indirect victim.

Lessons Learned From This Case


MCFD wrongfully removed the son of a RCMP officer who is a single mother. Hear what a former U.S. CPS worker said below.
  1. Toya Graham's action inevitably keep the police (and of course her son as well) out of harm's way. Authorities are more tolerant on her behavior because it is perceived as a support of the police who is reduced to a lapdog to serve the industry by child protection law. It is noteworthy to remark that working with service providers does not exempt the police from oppression. A single mother police officer in B.C. had her son removed and shared her experience in the video on the left.

  2. At the point of writing, CPS in Baltimore has not removed her children. Toya Graham continues to enjoy her celebrity as a praised mother. CPS is certainly aware of her action and has chosen not to remove. Why? CPS has a dilemma. If they act to remove her all children (note that all, not just the 16-year old Michael), they will attract negative publicity of persecuting a popular single mother with a minority background who has been praised by the local police chief for her disciplinary action. It will raise a lot of eyebrows and embarrassing questions. If they do not act, this is clearly selective law enforcement and failure to carry out its mandate of "protecting children" according to CPS industry standard.

  3. Parental right to discipline children are stripped by child protection law. Despite whether parents have crossed the boundary permitted by the Criminal Code, they are at risk of losing the custody of their children if they use corporal punishment.

  4. Visible minorities have an over representation in foster care. In Canada, Aboriginals kids are high value targets to the children protection industry because the federal government subsidizes their removal on a per head basis, effectively rendering them as tools for provincial and territorial governments to seek federal transfer payments that help to improve provincial budgets.

  5. CPS inaction suggests that the industry is opportunistic with little loyalty to a cause or moral principle. The only devotion is to protect the financial interests of its service providers. By acting against its common practice, the industry stays out of spotlight in a potential controversy that could attract unwanted attention, public scrutiny and outrage.

  6. From a broader perspective, there are serious racial and corruption problems in the U.S. that demand government effort to solve. Perhaps, the U.S. government should "pivot to North America" and focus more on its own domestic problems rather than preserving its hegemony by playing the role of world police and interfere international affairs.

References

[This page was conceptualized on 6 May 2015, added on 8 May 2015, last revised on 8 May 2015.]