MCQUAID STORY
McQuaid story
Robert T McQuaid (rtmq@stn.net)
Go here for the whole story: http://www.nh.ultranet.com/~harvey/kenmcquaid.html
-------------
On November 16, 1999, a
legal action was started against our family by kidnapping our child - an
apprehension to use the legal euphemism.
Before we knew anything
about it, Tina Berryman, an employee of Molly Maid who had cleaned our home
once, made a complaint. Our home is too large for my wife Linda and me to
clean, so we have a maid service. Tina Berryman has no statement on
record, only a paraphrase by a social worker. It appears the maid was
appalled that the house needed cleaning when she arrived.
On Tuesday November 16,
around 10 am, two people showed up at our door wearing smiles but clearly
hostile, inviting themselves into our home. I refused them permission to
enter. There were a few words exchanged, in which they identified
themselves as representatives of Children's Aid with a complaint that there was
a lock on our child's door. I ended the discussion by closing the door.
At 6:15 pm the same day,
two policemen came with a woman from Children's Aid, showing a warrant
authorizing them to apprehend our son, Ken aged 3 years. I respected the
warrant, but declined to answer any substantive questions until talking to a
lawyer. After my wife talked to the police for an hour, one of the
policemen told me our child would be left with us if I removed a broken crib
from Ken's room, otherwise Ken would be taken to a foster home. I
retreated to my office to call a lawyer, but since the raid was after business
hours, it took 15 minutes. I removed the crib and they took Ken anyway.
I gave him a goodbye hug and he was gone. They did not really suspect
abuse, because they did not examine Ken before taking him.
Linda got to visit
Children's Aid on Wednesday and Thursday, on the second visit they even let her
visit Ken for a while. She took a toy and clothing for Ken both times and
recognized when Ken was having a bowel movement, requiring her to leave for a
clean diaper. These facts were misrepresented in the CAS affidavits.
We got a lawyer, Evelyn
Huber, to represent us and Friday morning we were informed that Children's Aid
intended to apply for crown wardship, meaning that we would never see Ken again.
I am a graduate of six foster homes and two boarding schools, and I know from
personal experience just what a nightmare they are. Our care of Ken was
heaven compared to that.
The next Monday at 10 am
we went to the Orangeville Courthouse with our lawyer, and she worked out a
consent agreement with Children's Aid, under which we could get Ken returned in
nine days provided we complied with six listed conditions. As part of the
consent, we were permitted to visit Ken for one hour each weekday.
At 3 pm I saw Ken for the
first time since his abduction, Linda for the second time. We had to enter
a building with a sign affixed to the window "Lesbian and Gay Positive
Space", and in smaller type, "This is a place where human rights are
respected, and where gays, lesbians, bisexuals, their friends and allies are
welcomed and supported". Every door has a locking mechanism, many
operated by remote control. Ken entered, and we were ushered to a closed
room with a one-way mirror allowing observation from the adjacent room (it had
open blinds on it), several surveillance cameras and concealed microphones.
Ken had a sad-sack look, more depressed than any I had ever seen before. It took
him a half-hour to regularly smile. When he realized that we were leaving,
he cried intensely in a way that we had never seen before.
For six more consecutive
weekdays we saw Ken under the same conditions. Later, Kim James filed
thousands of words of affidavits using our visits as evidence against us.
On Tuesday Ken's spirits were improved. Children's Aid had agreed Monday
to let us take Ken for a haircut, but Kim James reneged. After Wednesday's
visit two social workers, Kim James and Nina Little, met with us. Kim opened the
questioning by asking "How do you feel?". That was quite a question
from a kidnapper.
On Tuesday November 23, a
reporter from the Toronto Sun, Jean Sonmor, visited us at home to get our side
of the story, and on Wednesday she called Children's Aid, to get their side.
Also on Wednesday, our lawyer called with a gripe that there was material on the
internet about our case that Children's Aid considered libelous. Hard to
understand, because most of what I had posted was merely verbatim copies of
their documents. Still, I sent them an email offering to correct any
libels (copy below). They did not respond, but the next day's treatment
may be their response.
On Thursday we met Ken at
3:15 pm for an hour. During the session I took a too-loud toy cell phone
from Ken, ignoring his 20 second tantrum, then he climbed contentedly onto my
lap. Kim James and her supervisor Kim Evans came in after the visit and
questioned us about the six conditions in our consent. We were in
compliance with all, except that the day-care arrangements were under way and
not yet completed. Then they asked questions unrelated to the consent, and
after five minutes I suggested that Linda should stop giving answers outside the
scope of the consent. Switching from friendliness to hostility, they said
they would find us not in compliance with the consent and announced that they
were going to proceed with crown wardship taking Ken from us permanently.
When Ken cried today, they said, I did not comfort him. So we had
accomplished nothing. Reviewing the agreement, the writing did not get us
Ken back December first, that was merely their oral promise.
That evening I had to call
a suicide prevention line to get help for my wife, and later drove her to the
hospital emergency room for sedatives to make it through the night. To
maintain family harmony, I had to end all efforts at exposure through the press
or the internet.