AYLMER CASE
Aylmer Spanking case - Collection
Let's not confuse the issue. This is not a case of "spanking", but a case of "abduction".
Essential points:
Please excuse the
following collection, which is in no particular order.
Cheers…
Giuseppe Gori
Regarding the attached note of Mr. Winter, the statement would need to be more clear and precise in connecting the kidnapping (or other vices) to the Tories. What I mean is that if you say that "they kidnapped the 7 children" - they could easily pass the buck and say, "no, it was the CAS, and we have an arms-length relationship" or something similar to their bit about not intruding in the other jurisdictions of gov't. Instead the statement should target them for specific pieces of legislation ie. Bill 6, which in turn causes these kind of travesties of injustice such as the Aylmer kidnapping.
Maurice.
mbrink@hcl.com
Ø
TO: <mailbox@johnbaird.com>
Dear Mr. Baird,
Minister of Community and Social Services, Ontario.
Ø I and my social conservative friends are very upset over the kidnapping of 7 children in Aylmer by the CAS. In the next election you cannot win without the votes of social conservatives. If those children are not returned to their parents with all due haste us social conservatives will vote Liberal [or if you have a conscience "Family Coalition Party"] to punish you. We will organize every social conservative in the Province to commit themselves to vote Liberal in punishment. You guys hide behind the separation of the judicial and legislative branches of government. That is a cop out. You set up the CAS. Now deal with it by firing Bailey and returning the kids. John Winter.
= = = = = =
From Prof. Doug Adams to his MPP:
Dear Dianne,
I must confess that it is with a deep sense of shock that I read this morning's newspaper. The article in question is found on the front page of the London Free Press entitled "Cops drag seven kids from home." I realize that we must always take the media with a grain of salt but if there is even an ounce of truth to this article then it is time to rip down the flag and mourn the death of our precious liberties.
I have never written to An M.P. before. I have often felt a sense of righteous indignation at the directions I have seen our country heading. However, with this story I am horrified beyond anything I have ever felt in my life. As you will know if you have read the article the CAS seized 7 children, not because they were spanked but because their parents would not lie and promise not to spank them. There was no evidence of bruising and yet because of the fear that sometime in the future they might be traumatized by some disciplinary action they have been wrenched from their family and parents in an action that will undoubtedly scar them for life. Were they spanked a thousand times the trauma would not begin to compare with this inflicted upon them by the authoritarian CAS.
Who is there to protect them from the CAS?
Since when has the CAS become a law unto itself?
Where are our politicians when such a travesty of justice occurred?
Do we no longer have constitutional rights of religious liberty?
Did all our forefather's die in vain in two world wars as they laid down their lives to defend our precious liberties?
The same liberties they died to protect seem to have been surrendered to a social agency which has run amuck!
The whole question of discipline is of course a thorny one. There are many within this country who on the basis of Biblical or religious ideas would still hold to some form of corporal discipline. Most of us who are now parents ourselves once upon a time experienced the rod of correction. I know some would argue that we were abused. However, when are these so called experts going to take their head out of the sand and look around.
The bigger problem surely is a lack of discipline. Back when the strap was in the schools we had a healthy fear of disobedience. The worst problems encountered were running in the halls, talking in class and chewing gum!
Now we face teenage pregnancy, suicide, weapons offenses, drugs, etc., etc.
I know that there are many other factors as well but you would be stupid to believe that discipline is not at least part of the problem. There has been and is growing concern about the Young Offenders Act. Is it not this very issue? There is not force behind law. There is no discipline.
The situation has now become so pronounced that an agency of the government will punish those who do discipline; will walk in and take children away for disciplinary measures we all faced when we were children. Yet you never hear of children being removed because their parents don't exercise any form of discipline. Yet what is more serious? I have witnessed countless cases of kids who have had no discipline from home. They are the most lawless individuals I know. They have no respect for authority! This to me is a far greater abuse than using a switch on a child. (I would not personally use such a thing myself, but I would argue for the right of a man to do so within obvious limits. But even an abuse of that measure cannot compare to abduction by a fascist government agency!) Encourage this trend of discountenancing discipline and we have the perfect recipe for social disintegration.
Short of murder I would consider abduction the greatest crime a man could commit. Yet, under the sanction of our government and with the support of our law enforcement agencies the CAS has brazenly abducted 7 children from their parents. Every man and woman who played any part in this horrific event ought right now to be facing criminal charges.
The government officials who protect them should be charged with complicity in the crime!
Instead we will all bury our heads in the sand and try our best to forget.
One by one we will surrender our freedoms until suddenly it is we ourselves who face the loss. Then who will be left to protest our victimization?
Obviously there are real cases of abuse out there but it seems that the CAS is so caught up with meddling in decent, godly and moral people's lives that they don't have time to do anything about those. How many more children will find their way into drug addiction and prostitution or be lost to teenage suicide because of the real abuse of non discipline before this aberrant society gets its act together or is brought to justice?
I wonder how many will even raise an eyebrow this morning? How many will even understand what we have obviously lost? Today I am ashamed to call myself Canadian. Our flags should be at half mast! We who were once proud Canadians can only but cry "Shame, Shame, Shame!"
Yours
Sincerely,
Doug Adams
================================================================
Professor Doug Adams
The Toronto Baptist
email: daa@tbs.edu
Seminary and Bible College
web: www.tbs.edu
130 Gerrard St. East
Tel: (416) 925-3263
Toronto ON M5A 3T4 Canada Fax:
(416) 925-8305
= = =
Well, I'm back in the land of the living after a respite that continued a little longer than I anticipated with no computer. Many of you are on other lists and have received some of this material so my apologies for you receiving them again but here is the material that has come my way since last week on the Aylmer kidnapping / child-assault-by-the-state case, including a memo from HSLDA. I will be sending an additional email later of my own regarding discussions I have had and information I have gleaned outside of what has come my way by way of email. I was of the understanding that a Mr. Bailey was responsible for this Aylmer kdinapping case, but have been told by somebody that an SS agent by the name of Flint is actually responsible (to the degree that responsibility is an applicable word in any fashion at all as descriptive. I haven't even been able to keep up with the TV and radio news while my computer's been down so can somebody clarify that for me. Also, a website address was sent to me which I include at the end of this message. I haven't had a chance to peruse it properly so I don't know if it is the one that the human-skin-lamp-makers (that's a reference to Hitler's regime for those who don't know!) are trying to stamp out for violating the Ontario court's gag order on the case. If so, I guess I'm a co-conspirator now. This case demonstrates that the grossest forms of ignorance are acceptable in the leadership of this society, but ignorance of the law is probably still not an excuse. What can you do when you live on an "Animal Farm"?
Tim B.
--------
First, MPP Steve Peters sent me a letter when I Cc'd him the letter I sent to top Gestapo agent, Bailey, that appears to be a form letter he is sending everyone because somebody else forwarded to me the same letter received by him on email. Below is his form letter and the response I sent him.
-----Original
Message-----
From: Steve_Peters-MPP-CO@ontla.ola.org
[mailto:Steve_Peters-MPP-CO@ontla.ola.org]
Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2001 9:30 AM
To: lydia@travel-net.com
Cc: sbailey@caselgin.on.ca
Subject: RE: Letter to Bailey re. gestapo kidnapping of children
This is a judicial matter and before the courts. The Members' Integrity Act, 1994 is very clear that although the Legislature and the Judiciary are both branches of the provincial government, they are separate and independent and in accordance with parliamentary convention, any encroachment in either direction is strictly forbidden. Our democratic system of government is composed of three branches - Legislative, Executive and Judicial. Each is supreme within its own jurisdiction and there shall be no encroachment in either direction.
As such, it would be entirely inappropriate for any elected member of the Legislature to make any comment on this case whatsoever. For Mr. Peters to become involved in this case would be a violation of the Members' Integrity Act.
Suzanne
van Bommel
Executive Assistant
Steve Peters MPP
Elgin Middlesex London
MY RESPONSE:
I understand that, but it sure would have been nice if the Tories, Liberals and NDP didn't unanimously support the bill (Bill 6) that stregthened the powers of the CAS about a year or so ago. Perhaps Mr. Peters will introduce a bill in the Legislature called the Freedom Lovers' Anti-Tyranny bill designed to abolish the Children's Aid Society and the Ontario Human Rights Commission. Perhaps the constitution should have been invoked against the anti-constitutional legislation that the CAS works under instead of to try to protect MPPs from criticism and accountability.
Sincerely
Tim Bloedow
--------
From:
HSLDA of Canada
To: info@hsldacanada.org
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 8:04 AM
Subject: Children's Aid Case in Aylmer, Ontario
July 11, 2001 Vol.1 No. 5
Dear home schooling family,
News has been circulating in the media and in the home school circles about a family in Aylmer, Ontario who had their 7 children taken away by the Children's Aid Society. We are apalled at the treatment this family received and are following the situation closely.
History:
The family involved in this situation has seven children between the ages of 6 and 14. The area's Children's Aid Society decided to take the children after the parents refused to promise that they would stop spanking their children. The children were removed kicking and screaming out of their home because of accusations their parents may spank them with sticks and belts.
Many neighbours are convinced there wasn't any abuse and spoke to the media of how happy and congenial the children are.
What we are doing:
This family is not a member of HSLDA and do not home school their children.
We have consulted with the people involved on many occasions over the past few days, but we can not commit ourselves to taking on this case as the family does not hold a membership with us. Nevertheless, we assisted the family in finding lawyers and will continue to work closely with the lawyers representing this family to ensure that the most family-friendly result is reached. We will be taking action on this to the best of our ability.
The recent court appearance:
On Monday, June 9th the family had their first court appearance. The children will remain in the temporary care and custody of Family and Children's Services, pending further court proceedings. The parents have regular access to the children and the matter will be back in court on July 26, 2001.
Next steps:
1. You can show support for this family and for parental rights and freedoms by taking a few minutes to email, write, or call someone who has influence in this area. Writing a letter to your local newpaper would also be beneficial. Public opinion appears to be strong in support of this family and we need to take advantage of that.
Some possible themes that you could use:
- Parents should not be condemned for using reasonable discipline when carried out in a loving and caring manner.
- The way in which the social services handled this situation was "shocking"and they should be made to answer for their actions.
- Urge social workers to give parents the benefit of the doubt and respect the religious views of parents.
Contact information for people of influence:
-
Premier Mike Harris
Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto ON M7A 1A1
webprem@gov.on.ca
416.325.1941 - O
416.325.3745 - F
-
Hon. John Baird
Minister of Community and Social Services (and Minister Responsible for
Children)
Hepburn
Block - 6th
Floor
80
Grosvenor Street
Toronto ON K2H 9C2
mailbox@johnbaird.com
416.325.5225 - O
416.325.5221 - F
-
Steve Peters
M.P.P. for
Elgin-Middlesex-London (Liberal)
Room 331 - Legislative Building
Queen's Park
Toronto ON M7A 1A4
steve_peters-mpp@ontla.ola.org
416.325.7250 - O
416.325.7262 - F
- For Ontario members, find the contact information for you local M.P.P. at: www.ontla.on.ca/Members/mailing_addresses/index.htm
2. Pray that the children will be returned to this family as soon as possible and for the lawyers representing them.
3. Financial support for the family can be sent to:
Family Legal Defence Fund
P.O. Box 82
Aylmer, ON N5H 2R8
Dallas
K . Miller, Q.C.
Senior Counsel & Executive Director
Home
School Legal Defence Association of Canada
#2-3295 Dunmore Rd. SE
Medicine Hat, AB
TAB 3R2
(403) 528-2704 (Office)
(403) 529-2694 (Fax)
= = =
From:
Joseph
A. Gamero
To: Premier
Mike Harris
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 6:23 PM
Dear Mr. Premier,
Just in case you don't remember me (I'm not arrogant enough to expect you to), I'm Joseph Gamero, from Hamilton and one of your staunch supporters, from day one.
I want that clear, because I'm going to criticize one (maybe two) actions of your government. The difference is, I'm doing it in the hope that they were an oversight, and not with a destructive purpose.
The situation in Aylmer is absolutely intolerable in a free society. It is reminiscent of the German attitude in Poland (to a certain extent only, of course) or the one the Soviet Union adopted. Even the Soviets, only took the children into their custody, at the beginning of their movement, and they stopped shortly after.
I know this was not the intent of the government in passing legislation that permitted this abuse, but a strong reaction is required to make sure it doesn't happen again.
The social engineers responsible for this atrocity must be made to pay the consequences of their irresponsible act. It must be a penalty strong enough to deter further abuses of this sort.
"First they came for the Jews, I'm not a Jew, so I did nothing." This resounds in the minds of those of us who have studied the mistakes of the past everywhere, so as to learn from them. Yes, I know the situation is not the same (thank God) than that in the Nazi Germany, but the Germans didn't think at first, that it would go that far...
It appears that about one hundred families are moving away from their chosen community for fear of loosing their children.
Mr. Premier, in the year 2001, with a Conservative government in the richest province of this country, this is enough to motivate large corporations to move their plants and offices to friendlier grounds.
We already have enough worries watching over our shoulders for the unfair attacks on the family, perpetrated by the Chretien liberals.
C.A.S. has too much power. In fact, C.A.S. has no more reason to exist, than a special police to protect homosexuals would. We are all protected under the same laws! Children have the same rights under the Charter and other legislation, than the rest of us. This is your opportunity to do away with what the socialists imposed on us in the past.
The second issue has to do with the proposed changes to the Employment Standards Act, which would no longer exclude Realtors from its provisions, as it did in the past. These changes would do away with a vibrant industry, that is a source of a great deal of cash for the government.
Would you please give consideration to these thoughts and take corrective action? I'm sorry to take so much of your time, is just that I am very involved in politics, I'm for that reason in touch with a great deal of people, and I don't like what I hear from them.
My support will not diminish if the answer is no, but my enthusiasm will.
Yours as usual,
Joseph
A. Gamero
jagamero@primus.ca
--------
LifeSite Daily News - July 9, 2001
CHILDREN NOT RETURNED TO FAMILY AFTER HEARING
AYLMER, ON - A hearing today in the case of a Christian family whose 7 children aged 6 to 14 were taken from their home by police last Wednesday has not led to the children's return home. LifeSite has learned that an interim hearing is scheduled for July 26 and a trial for August 9.
The family's pastor, Rev. Henry Hildebrandt of the Aylmer Church of God, told LifeSite that there is no merit to the actions of the Children's Aid Society and the police since the family is in no way abusive to their children. The CAS had visited the family's home a number of times likely after someone made a complaint about the family. Rev. Hildebrandt said that the last visit on Wednesday was intended to be the conclusion of the investigation since the CAS found no evidence of any harm to the children.
However, when the parents refused to promise social workers that they would never spank their children with an object such as a switch, the CAS apprehended the children with the assistance of the police.
Aylmer police deputy chief, Andre Reymer, suggested that the apprehension was decided on the failure of the parents to promise never to spank with an object, even though there were no injuries. "We believed that it would continue to occur because they would not promise to stop," Reymer told the Toronto Star. Moreover, a social worker interviewed by the Star who wished to remain nameless confirmed that the CAS search for injuries on the children turned up nothing. "There were no bruises or anything like that," said the worker. Police also confirmed that the resistance put up by Pastor Hildebrandt's congregation was all peaceful. "It was passive resistance.
They surrounded the children," Reymer said. "It was like breaking up a protest."
Pastor Hildebrandt notes that before the hearing today the parents were denied communications with their children. "They said the children could talk by telephone to their parents," he said. "Now they say it's not possible," he told the Star Saturday.
The family's neighbours attested to the family's good character. Next-door neighbour Ernie Timmons told the Star the family was quiet and said he never heard any problems. "Those children, believe me, they were happy. They were always playing. They were forever rollerblading, bicycling and playing all the time." Timmons witnessed the apprehension and was very distressed by what he saw. "I saw a policeman bringing out this little girl," Timmons said. "She was shouting and hollering for help. I could see the fear in her face. It was unbelievable." He said he was so upset with what he saw he had trouble sleeping Wednesday night. Timmons said that after the little girl was carried out, they brought out an 8-year-old child. "You've never heard so much squealing, crying and wailing from children," he said. "These kids are scarred for life. The (workers) don't realize the scars they put on these little kids." Timmons concluded, "The CAS people should be charged with kidnapping. They are the ones that should have been sent away."
--------
We¹re losing our liberties at Aylmer, ON and at the UN
By
Ron Gray, National Leader
Christian Heritage Party of Canada
July 15, 2001
http://www.websbyu.com/chp/index.html
Parents' rights, many long-standing legal protections, the Canadian Constitution, and the Criminal Code have all come under attack in recent moves by governments in Canada. Meanwhile the federal government, silently watching it all unfold, is allowing its bureaucrats at the UN to flush our rights‹and conventional standards of morality‹down the drain.
Some individual cases cannot be discussed in detail, because they are before the courts; many cases are matters of provincial jurisdiction. Yet there is an urgency to comment at the federal and international level, because principles that affect all Canadians are at stake.
The most recent event was the apprehension-the virtual arrest-of seven children in Aylmer, Ontario by police acting on instructions from the Family and Children's Services agency. No news report, nor any statement from FACS, has ever indicated any evidence of abuse. The reported reason for the seizure was that the parents had refused to promise not to spank their children-a right protected under sec. 43 (3) of the Criminal Code.
Provincial politicians who have been asked to intervene have replied that they cannot act because of a 1994 provincial statute-ironically called "The Members¹ Integrity Act"‹ which protects the executive branch in Ontario from "interference" by the legislature!
If elected members in any province are prohibited by a provincial statute from making enquiries when there is reason to suspect that the executive branch has exceeded its authority, the federal government has a constitutional obligation to declare that legislation ultra vires; no legislature has the power to legislate away citizens¹ right of appeal to their representatives for redress!
The Aylmer case, about which we cannot have all the details because of a gag order imposed by the court, is not unique: many other cases of children being taken from their parents by over-zealous Children¹s Services workers have occurred‹notably in Ontario and BC‹in recent years. Often the proximal cause has been a CS worker¹s personal objection to parents¹ use of corporal punishment, even when it was kept within the provisions of the Criminal Code.
The Criminal Code of Canada forbids child abuse, with severe penalties; but it allows spanking that is "reasonable" discipline. However, many social workers-by-passing the clear wording of the Code-consider all spanking to be "abuse", and occasionally they may put their personal opinions ahead of the legislation. If that only occurs in occasional instances, it can and should be dealt with by departmental discipline; unfortunately, in recent years departmental discipline has tended to protect, rather than correct, over-zealous social workers. Why? Probably because departmental officials, who are often graduates of the same schools of social work, have acquired the same ideas; and along with those ideas, they have been taught that their task as "change agents in society" can even supersede legislative authority. Similar revolutionary ideas are being taught at most Canadian universities in the schools of social work, education and law.
Recently, at the United Nations, Canadian representatives were among those who voted in favour of a draft proposal‹mercifully defeated by the combined opposition of the Vatican and the Muslim nations‹which would have (a) made criticism of homosexuality a criminal offense (b) allowed charges to be brought anonymously under that regulation, and (c) exempted sex education materials used in schools from obscenity laws.
None of those provisions had ever been discussed in Canada¹s Parliament; MPs were not even given the opportunity to voice their opinions. Our dictatorial federal government either mandates such legal and moral outrages, or negligently allows federal civil servants to perpetrate them with impunity.
Several historic principles have been openly violated in these recent instances of federal and provincial malfeasance:
o The right to face one¹s accusers would have been obliterated by the UN proposal which the Canadian delegation supported.
o The presumption of innocence is being violated in many provincial "apprehensions": children are seized because FACS officials 'think' parents 'might' abuse them-not under any of the provisions of existing legislation, but only in the opinion of radical activist social workers.
o Traditional morality is actually in danger of being made illegal‹without any oversight by democratic legislatures-while immorality is publicly endorsed, and even taught to captive audiences of children, with or without their parents¹ consent.
o Three provinces now allow homosexual couples to adopt children, in spite of recent peer-reviewed scientific evidence that children reared in same-sex households may suffer psychological malformation. This, coupled with activist social workers¹ seizure of children because of legal spanking, could soon result in children being taken from Christian homes where they are receiving godly instruction, and placed under foster care by homosexuals, to be taught that gross immorality is "normal"!
o The sovereignty of national legislatures is being over-ridden‹and Canada's diplomats and legal authorities are helping to bring about this erosion of our liberties. Canadian governmental and political leaders stand by silently, letting it happen.
o The core principles of the Preamble to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms are being unconstitutionally overridden; those principles state that "Canada was founded upon principles which recognize the supremacy of God" capital 'G': the God of the Bible and the rule of law." Both those principles are being openly violated, and our federal and provincial governments sit passively by, derelict in their responsibility to uphold the Constitution and to protect citizens' rights!
o The major news media have utterly failed their responsibility to inform citizens of what is happening to their rights.
What can we citizens do?
It is now imperative for us‹every individual citizen‹to create a public clamor for the defense of our historic legal and political liberties, before they are lost forever. Such an outcry must be peaceful, but it must also be incessant: freedom-loving citizens must write, fax and phone their elected representatives-and we must refuse to take, "I¹m sorry; there's nothing I can do" for an answer.
And if one call does not bring results, we must call again‹and again, and again, and again. Until the legislators at all levels fear an uprising at the ballot box, they will continue to supinely allow this erosion of our rights‹or to actively work to subvert our rights, since that is the philosophical orientation of many of the people we have elected.
Canada and the Scandinavian nations are being used today as stalking-horses at the United Nations and elsewhere to advance a global agenda for overturning conventional standards of morality, decency and the integrity of the family. This social revolution could never be accomplished openly through democratically-elected governments, but it is being imposed by stealth, and by the destruction of our legal system.
Only an aroused citizenry, expressing its outrage insistently, can arrest the progress of this immoral agenda.
============================================================
Straight thoughts 75
July 15th, 2001
Unreported by the media, last Wednesday one more family has been "contacted" by the Children's Aid Society (CAS) in Aylmer, from the same group (Church of God) who admit of spanking their children (which is perfectly legal).
The family has not wasted any time and has left the community. A pastor, last week, suggested this action, and even suggested to "leave the country", if the persecution was serious.
Does it remind you of the German occupation in Poland in 1940? "They first came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did nothing… "
The CAS, an Ontario Government Agency, is acting legally in force of Bill 6 (A bill introduced last year by the PC government giving the power to the CAS to intervene if they think the environment is - in their opinion - "not suitable" for the children) and the Family & Children Services Act of Ontario section 45-8 (prohibiting the publication of information - such as names and photographs identifying the children abducted).
The CAS has the "mandate" to investigate ALL leads and can harass a family on a pure hearsay. The police, of course, is obliged to help. The public is kept in the dark.
From several cases (two in Ottawa and two in Aylmer, that I know of), it seems that they are targeting Christian families.
May be because (in their opinion) a family with more than two children cannot possibly function, or feed them properly, or keep the house clean.
May be because they can obtain a higher number of children (and thus more money) in one scoop.
May be because many Christians spank their children.
May be because they want to wipe out "regressive" religions from society.
At the same time, the Globe on July 9th reported that nine children were given for adoption by the CAS to gay parents in Toronto alone.
It is obvious that none of the other political parties in Ontario is interested in changing the "interventionist" and immoral direction aiming at removing children from the influence of (Christian) parents - including physical abduction - with laws undermining the authority of parents, early childhood education, centralization of the school curriculum and centralized collection of education taxes, mandatory sex education, increasing the power of the CAS (Bill 6), removing fathers from families (Bill 117), divorce laws, laws re-defining the traditional family, laws supporting homosexual couples with public funds, removing parents from "health" decisions of their children, lowering the age for independence, consensual sex and sodomy, and too many "Acts" to mention.
Only the Family Coalition Party of Ontario has written principles mandating the protection of life, freedom and property of families.
Are you going to wait until they come for your children and grandchildren… or are you going to help us?
Giuseppe Gori
Leader@FamilyParty.ON.CA
Persecution of families must stop!
= = = = = = =
I have to make an addendum to Straight thoughts 75.
Two points.
One. The developments in Aylmer are so fast, that by the time I sent my message it was already obsolete.
If you heard the news today, up to 100 women and children may have left the community out of fear that the CAS will take away their children. What else can they do?
We need to be careful not to attribute the CAS action to some "war against religion". The CAS's only way out of this situation is to demonstrate that they (the Church of God) is not your average family, but "Fundamentalist Christians who beat their children" so as to reassure the average Canadian family and attack fundamentalist Christians at the same time. Their strategy will probably be: "Divide and rule".
We need to unite on this issue, as an attack "on the family". This is pure tyrannical intervention and scare tactics on the family with the excuse of spanking, but without legal foundation (spanking is legal) and a "trial on intentions": children were removed NOT for spanking done, but for the possibility that it would be done in the future.
Would anyone be able to arrest a thief, or a murderer because he does not want to promise that he will not steal or murder again? The answer is NO. A confessed murderer, after serving his time in jail, could remain defiant, provided he does not threaten any recognizable person or group and it cannot be demonstrated that he poses a danger to the public in general. "Promising not to do it again" is not a condition for release.
So the actions of the CAS (and the Judge's decision to let them keep the children) are appalling and should be denounced.
Two. I made the mistake of putting the famous quote "They first came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew, so I did nothing… "
Just after the phrase "Does it remind you of the German occupation in Poland in 1940?"
The two phrases were not related. I did not want to imply that the Polish people, who were invaded, are in any way at fault, when in fact they tried to help the Jews.
My intention here was twofold.
First remind you of the tactics used by the Germans in Poland, when targeting Jewish families, and how the Church of God community might see themselves equally targeted and persecuted by the Ontario Government and the Police.
Second, remind you of the very often quoted attitude of the majority of common German people, who perhaps could have rebelled against their own dictator, but did not. Are we different today? Or are we reacting with the same attitude: "It is not our community they violated… so I am going to do nothing".
Giuseppe
Gori
Leader@FamilyParty.ON.CA
Secrecy section
Family & Children Services Act of Ontario section 45-8 states 'no person shall publish or make public information that has the effect of identifying a child who is a witness at or a participant in a hearing or the subject of a proceeding, or the child's parent or foster parent or a member of the child's family.'
--------
Focus on the Family
Today's
Family News for July 10-12
Seizure of Children Denounced
Police and child-welfare personnel are being widely criticised for forcibly removing seven children aged six to 14 from their home in Aylmer, Ontario, last week. They were placed in foster care because their parents – members of a local Church of God congregation – allegedly refused to promise authorities that they would no longer spank them. By all accounts, the children had to be carried or dragged away, despite the protests of their horrified neighbours and church family. “We’re asking Canadians . . . if this is something they want to allow their government to do, or if they’re willing to stand up for their rights as parents,” said Rev. Ray Tinsman, a Church of God pastor from Ohio, according to the London Free Press. Tinsman and members of his church came to lend support to the Aylmer church and the parents. “There’s going to be a court challenge,” Rev. Henry Hildebrandt, the family’s pastor, predicted in the Toronto Star. While insisting that a parent’s right to use corporal discipline “as a last resort” to correct a child’s behaviour is a biblical injunction that they are prepared to defend, Hildebrandt added: “We do not condone abusing children in any way.”
Pro-family advocates are just as outraged, especially since there appears to be scant evidence that any of the children had been physically harmed. (“There were no bruises or anything like that,” one unidentified worker who interviewed the children told the Star.) “It causes us great concern to see a family ripped apart in such a brutal manner,” stated Focus on the Family Canada President Dr. Darrel Reid. “There had to be a better way to handle this. Such heavy-handedness on the part of the local authorities is shocking.” “To take seven children away kicking and screaming shows a tremendous insensitivity and lack of understanding of little children,” REAL Women of Canada[*1] national vice-president Gwen Landolt told the National Post. “The trauma caused by the ineptitude and the incompetence of the welfare authorities will be with [the children] forever.” Brian Rushfeldt, executive director of the Canada Family Action Coalition[*2], added, “If it’ s proven that there was no physical abuse that was taking place in that home, there should be charges laid against the government officials who very intrusively went into this family and disrupted it.” On Monday, a family court judge in St. Thomas, Ontario, ordered that the children remain in foster care. Their parents would be allowed supervised visits.
Under Section 43[*3] of the Criminal Code, parents are “justified in using force by way of correction” to discipline their children as long as “the force does not exceed what is reasonable under the circumstances.” A year ago this month, an Ontario Superior Court judge[*4] rejected a constitutional challenge to the law brought by anti-spanking advocates. The Coalition for Family Autonomy[*5], including Focus Canada, had intervened in support of Section 43. However, that ruling will be appealed in mid-September before the Ontario Court of Appeal. And once again, Reid says the CFA will be there to argue the merits of the law. “For many parents, spanking can be a helpful tool for correcting their children,” he states.
“It isn’t the only tool or even the primary tool, but when necessary it can be a very effective tool.”
[*1]
http://www.realwomenca.com/
[*2]
http://www.familyaction.org/
[*3]
http://lois.justice.gc.ca/en/C-46/35442.html
[*4] http://qsilver.queensu.ca/law/restrict/bala/law525/canadianchildren'sfoundation(s.43).htm
[*5] http://www.fotf.ca/research/press/archives/070600.html
Copyright 2001 Focus on the Family (Canada) Association.
--------
Focus
on the Family Canada
Today's Family News for July 13-16
UPDATE: THE AYLMER SPANKING CASE
It could be several weeks at best before the seven children who were forcibly removed from their home last week in Aylmer, Ontario, will be permanently reunited with their parents. On Monday, a family court judge ruled that they remain in foster care pending a court hearing into allegations that the children may have been physically abused. The parents, members of the Church of God denomination, believe the Bible gives them the authority to spank their children. Friends and fellow church members say[*1] the accusations of abuse are totally groundless. The case will be back before the court on July 26, but the father’s lawyer told the London Free Press that the judge will likely deal at that time only with procedural matters prior to an actual court hearing. The judge did allow the parents limited, supervised access to their children, ages six to 14.
Visit Focus on the Family Canada's Web site to read our position on the case along with an action step[*2] to voice your concerns.
[*1] http://www.childrentaken.com/
[*2] http://www.fotf.ca/research/actionguides/
Copyright 2001 Focus on the Family (Canada) Association.
---------
http://www.childrentaken.com/index.html
July 7, 2001
Kids' removal worse than
spanking: critic
Seven taken from parents: 'The
screeching was so unbearable that I had to leave,' neighbour says
Michael
Friscolanti
National
Post
Family rights organizations yesterday condemned "incompetent" child welfare officials for removing seven children "kicking and screaming" from their home because of accusations their parents may spank them with sticks and belts.
"The
government is always talking about doing things in the best interest of the
children," said Brian Rushfeldt, the executive director of the Canada
Family Action Coalition, an organization that works to preserve traditional
values. "But when you rip kids out, kicking and screaming, that isn't in
the best interest of the children."
Friends
and neighbours, who watched in horror on Wednesday as social workers and police
dragged the seven children from their Aylmer,
Ont., home, also slammed the "barbaric" raid.
"It's
about the most disgraceful thing I've seen in my life," said Ernie Timmins,
who was fertilizing his lawn next door when the police cruisers arrived.
"There was a six-year-old girl with policemen carrying her by her arms and
her legs and the fear in that kid's face was unbelievable. The screeching was so
unbearable that I had to leave."
The
children, aged six to 14, remain in the custody of social workers while their
parents prepare for a family court hearing scheduled for Monday.
"You
just feel like you want to wake up from a dream," said Henry Hildebrandt,
the family's pastor at the Aylmer
Church of God, located about 50 kilometres southeast of London.
He
said officials with the area's child services department told him they decided
to take the children only after the parents refused to promise never to hit the
children with rods or switches.
Corporal
punishment is validated by the teachings of the Bible, Mr. Hildebrandt said, and
it is common among his 200 parishioners.
"[The
children] want their parents to do it because it makes them happy
children," he said. "From time to time it is needed. It keeps them in
line."
It
is, to an extent, also legal. Last year, a judge with Ontario's Superior Court
of Justice ruled that spanking, and the section of the Criminal Code that
regulates it, does not violate children's constitutional rights as long as the
force is "reasonable under the circumstances."
Steve
Bailey, the executive director of Family and Children's Services of St. Thomas
and Elgin, said mere spanking is not enough to even warrant an investigation.
Although he would not speak specifically about this case, he said injuries or
weapons would have to be evident before his staff would take action.
"We
would not go to the removal stage unless we had some fairly clear sense of
presence of harm," he said.
Still,
spanking advocates say the violent seizure was more harmful to the children than
any form of spanking could be.
"To
take seven children away kicking and screaming shows a tremendous insensitivity
and lack of understanding of little children," said Gwen Landolt, the
national vice-president of REAL Women of Canada, an organization that promotes
the importance of family. "The trauma caused by the ineptitude and the
incompetence of the welfare authorities will be with [the children]
forever."
Added
Mr. Rushfeldt: "If it's proven that there was no physical abuse that was
taking place in that home, there should be charges laid against the government
officials who very intrusively went into this family and disrupted it."
Many
neighbours are convinced there was not any abuse.
"The
kids are nice and clean, well-dressed and well-disciplined," said one man,
who lives down the street from the family but did not want to be identified.
"They came by, spoke to us, and told us how nice our flowers are. Very
well-behaved kids."
The children were always smiling, others said, either riding bikes or playing in the yard.
"I live right beside them," Mr. Timmins said. "I'm sure I would have seen something that seemed suspicious."
July
10, 2001
Snatching children
National
Post
Last
week, social workers and police officers wrenched seven terrified children from
their home in Aylmer,
Ont. Aged six to 14, the three girls and four boys are in foster homes pending a
court date in two and a half weeks. Because this is a child protection matter,
information is scarce and some of it cannot be published. It appears these
children were forcibly removed from the bosom of their family not because they
were abused, but because they are cannon fodder in a philosophical and religious
debate over corporal punishment.
The
children's parents belong to a Christian congregation that believes the Bible
not only advocates spanking, but mandates a switch or strap be used as a last
resort. Anti-spanking advocates -- some of whom are employed as social workers
-- call this assault with a weapon. Despite reports that there was no physical
evidence of abuse, when the parents apparently refused to promise not to spank
their children in future, down swooped the police.
Adults
who recall being disciplined with wooden spoons, belts or other implements
during their childhoods may not remember such occasions fondly. But it is
unlikely that spanking proved as traumatic as being torn away from one's
parents. This seizure will remain forever in the minds of these seven children.
It is no small matter for a six-year-old to be removed screaming in terror from
her parents' arms. It is no small matter to be separated from one's siblings,
housed with strangers, and advised that your parents pose a danger to you.
Nightmares, distrust of authority figures, and misplaced guilt are the least of
the after-effects with which these youngsters will likely wrestle in coming
months.
There
has to be a terribly good reason, such as evidence physical injury, to justify
snatching children from their parents. If the evidence shows there was no such
justification, those responsible for Aylmer
should be snatched from their jobs.
July
10, 2001
Judge refuses to reunite
children, parents
7
children seized from home must remain in foster care
Michael
Friscolanti
National
Post
Seven
children forcibly taken from their home amid allegations their parents may spank
them with sticks will remain in foster care until a family court decides it is
safe for them to return home, an Ontario judge ruled yesterday.
The
children, four boys and three girls aged six to 14, will be allowed supervised
visits with their parents but will remain under the watchful eye of social
workers until at least July 26, when a date will likely be set to hear the case
against the accused parents.
After
yesterday's two-hour closed-door hearing, in which child welfare workers had to
explain why the children were seized, Mr. Justice Michael O'Dea ruled that the
apprehension appeared necessary.
"We
are not shocked," said Henry Hildebrandt, pastor at the Church of God in Aylmer, Ont.
"Knowing the way the system works, we are not surprised."
The
proceedings, except Judge O'Dea's ruling, are under a publication ban.
Dozens
of people gathered outside the St. Thomas, Ont., courthouse yesterday afternoon,
holding signs of support for a family they say is the victim of
"incompetent" child welfare workers.
The
gathering was similar to the group assembled outside the family's home last
Wednesday afternoon when Aylmer
police dragged the seven children, kicking and screaming, from their home. A
neighbour of the family said he had to walk away because the wailing was too
much to bear.
Workers
with the Family and Children's Services of St. Thomas and Elgin went to the
family's home to investigate a tip, but after interviewing the parents, who are
German-speaking immigrants from a Mexican Mennonite community, they became
convinced the children were in danger.
They
would not say what made the situation dangerous, but Mr. Hildebrandt had
previously said the parents simply refused to promise never to hit the children
with switches -- a disciplinary tactic he says is outlined in the Bible.
The
case has enraged parishioners at the Church of God -- who believe spanking
children with objects other than their hands is sanctioned by the Bible -- and
has reignited the debate over whether parents should be allowed to spank their
children.
Family
rights organizations praised it as a legitimate way to discipline kids, citing a
decision last year by Ontario's Superior Court of Justice that spanking, and the
section of the Criminal Code that regulates it, does not violate children's
constitutional rights as long as the force is "reasonable under the
circumstances."
Anti-spanking
advocates say it may be legal when it's done with a bare hand, but using a blunt
object is nothing short of child abuse.
Steve
Bailey, the executive director of the Family and Children's Services of St.
Thomas and Elgin, has not commented specifically about the case since the
children were seized last week.
"The
court can now sort out all of the issues that are being identified, and
obviously there are many issues," he said after returning to his office
from yesterday's hearing. "We'll see what happens in a few weeks
time."
NATIONAL
POST Story july 16 2001
Alymer, Ont. clash fans flames of debate over Canada's age-old 'spanking law'
JAMES MCCARTEN
Canadian Press
TORONTO
(CP) - Their young faces have been obscured for their protection, but through
the blur, the looks of anguish are unmistakable.
In
photo after searing photo, grim-faced police and child-welfare workers are
carrying the seven school-aged children from their family home, obviously
against their will.
Fears
that the children were being abused in the name of discipline prompted officials
to forcibly remove them from their home in the southwestern Ontario town of
Aylmer, Ont. last week.
And
when they did, a God-fearing fundamentalist Christian family was thrust headlong
into the latest instalment of an ever-present debate in Canada about the dangers
of corporal punishment.
"Society
as a whole used to believe in and practise spanking as one form of correction
for children; why is it a crime now?" wondered Susan Mutch, an ordained
minister of the Church of God in British Columbia.
Mutch's
Web site, www.childrentaken.com, is documenting the story - photos and all - in
an effort to drum up international support for the family, devout followers of
Mutch's church.
An
occasional spanking, "administered not in anger, but in loving care,"
is not abuse, Mutch wrote in a recent e-mail.
"These
children, who are very happy and contented, have been brought up in a very
loving environment," she said.
"How
grievous that they have been torn from it."
A
court ruled last week that the children must remain in the custody of the
Children's Aid Society for now, but with supervised visits from their parents.
The family is due back in court July 26.
At
the heart of Canada's corporal punishment debate is Section 43 of the Criminal
Code, which permits the use of "force by way of correction" as long as
it is "reasonable under the circumstances."
And
while it isn't enshrined in law, courts have long frowned on the use of
instruments such as straps, belts or paddles, said David Brown, a lawyer for the
Coalition for Family Autonomy.
The
section's lack of specifics are necessary to protect the rights of parents to
decide on their own how best to raise their children, Brown said.
"The
language of the section strikes a reasonable balance between the interests and
rights of parents to discipline their children on the one hand, and the need for
society to ensure that children are not subjected to abuse," he said.
"When
one looks at how the section has been interpreted by the courts over the years,
it has resulted in a reasonable, balanced approach to the issue."
The
section survived a constitutional challenge last year, but not before Superior
Court Justice David McCombs issued a ruling that hinted at a need for reform.
"The
evidence shows that public attitudes toward corporal punishment of children are
changing," McCombs said in his written decision.
"There
is a growing body of evidence that even mild forms of corporal punishment do no
good and may cause harm."
Opponents
of the section are taking their fight to the Ontario Court of Appeal in
September.
For
Corinne Robertshaw, the founder of the Toronto-based Repeal 43 Committee, the
section - unchanged since it was introduced into the Criminal Code some 109
years ago in 1892 - is little more than an age-old excuse to abuse one's
children.
"You
read Dickens, you read Samuel Johnson, the great man of letters of the 18th
century, and they just took it for granted that in order to teach children,
you've got to hit them; you've got to beat them," she said.
"Well,
it's the 21st century now."
Toronto
child psychologist Dr. Otto Weininger said he's afraid child-welfare workers may
have done more harm than good when they wrestled the children from their home
last week.
"It's
a terrible situation," Weininger said. "If you remove the child from
the home, what you make the child feel is, 'I must have been terrible, I must
have been bad.' And so you hear many kids say, 'Don't take me away, I'll be
good, I'll be good."'
Stories
that fuel debate about spanking resonate with people, he added, because they
pose a threat to one of the most long-standing tenets of child-rearing: the
undeniable authority of the parent.
"Most
parents really feel that they are in control, that they are the ones who have to
discipline and 'teach' their children," Weininger said.
"It's
almost as though the law parents the parent and the parent feels almost impotent
about dealing with their own children."
The
ongoing debate about corporal punishment stirs deep feelings, Brown agreed.
"There
are pretty diametrically opposed views in Canadian society now, probably of
almost equal measure, as to whether one should or should not spank a kid,"
he said.
"That's
been a debate ongoing for the better part of 20 or 25 years, and whenever you
get a high-profile case like this, it just rekindles the debate that's already
there."
The
two sides in the debate - organized religion and society's interest in the
safety of its children - will likely forever be at odds, Weininger added.
"We
have two forces at work," he said, "and they just ain't going to
match."
= = = =
July 17, 2001
Mary
Vallis and Jon Bricker
National
Post
AYLMER,
Ont. - Relatives of Christian fundamentalists joining an exodus from this small
town of 7,000 say it is the only way to ensure their children will not be seized
by child welfare officials.
"I
don't care if they don't come back," said one woman, whose sister attended
the Church of God with her husband and three children until she left town.
"I just wish they can keep their kids."
Congregants
of the Church have been under public scrutiny since seven children were dragged
from a member's home kicking and screaming this month amid allegations they had
been spanked with sticks and belts -- actions the Church is defending as a
literal interpretation of the Bible. Other families in the congregation now fear
they will lose their children, too.
At
least 26 mothers and 74 children -- enough to fill three classrooms -- have
apparently fled Aylmer for Church of God
communities in the United States and Mexico. More families are planning to
follow suit, according to sources.
Rumours
are flying that Elgin County's Family and Children's Services department has
turned up at the doors of several Church of God families in Aylmer since the initial incident, but a
department spokesman has refused to comment on whether any such investigations
are underway.
Meanwhile,
townspeople are struggling to make sense of this month's events. They cannot
agree on whether the exodus is justified.
"Doesn't
it sound like religious persecution?" said Kelly Reiter, who runs a deli at
Aylmer's
main intersection. "That's what it sounds like to me."
But
others believe the congregants must be running from the law. "Why would
they move if they aren't guilty?" one waitress mused as she gazed through a
restaurant window at the Church of God, a nondescript brick building at the edge
of town.
One
Mennonite community official said the parishioners' move may be a way of
garnering public support for their belief in corporal punishment. "I think
the Church is trying to make a political statement," he said.
The
homes of parishioners were dark yesterday. Neighbours reported they had not been
seen for days. Those who were reached declined to comment, referring reporters
to Henry Hildebrandt, their pastor. Mr. Hildebrandt, however, refused to discuss
the situation.
Separated
from town by a lush corn field, the Church of God is part of an international
order composed largely of German-speaking Mennonites from Mexico. The church is
under construction to make way for a schoolhouse for young congregants, who are
currently home-schooled.
Aylmer's
verdant streets are lined with at least 12 churches and the town is populated by
several Mennonite orders, but Church of God congregants are considered
outsiders, said Rev. Cameron Watts of Aylmer Baptist Church.
Even
so, many townspeople sympathize with the Church's view that sparing the rod
spoils the child.
Isaac Peters, a trucker who knows congregants who have left town, said he would have joined them by now if he was a