DOREY: CAS 85th Annual Meeting

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, June 17, 2005 The Halifax Herald Limited

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

VandenElsen supporters pose questions at aid society meeting

Officials refuse to talk details
By BARRY DOREY / Staff Reporter

Some supporters of Carline VandenElsen tried to make things uncomfortable for those attending the annual general meeting of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax on Thursday night.

Friends of the woman who was convicted last month on several charges stemming from a custody dispute that turned into a standoff with police in May 2004 peppered board members with questions.

Evangeline Godron asked whether thorough investigations precede every case in which the society seizes a child, alluding to allegations that Ms. VandenElsen's child was taken unjustly.

"We follow the protocol in all cases," acting CEO John Rowan told her.

He said the province sets out clear rules and guidelines that must be followed.

The society held its 85th annual general meeting at a Halifax hotel just blocks from the Shirley Street home that was the scene of the three-day standoff.

Ms. VandenElsen and her husband, Larry Finck, were found guilty last month of obstruction, abducting their baby in contravention of a child custody order and other charges.

The standoff began in earnest when a shot was fired over police officers' heads from inside the house and neighbours were evacuated.

The society issued a news release in anticipation of questions about the case, which it did not mention by name.

"The Children's Aid Society of Halifax is unable to comment on the specifics regarding any family it works with," the release said. "We appreciate that this allows unfounded allegations to go unanswered."

Ms. Godron also requested a breakdown of how much money or work that legal firms have contributed to the society or its charitable foundation.

The annual report states the society spent $571,412 on legal fees in the last fiscal year, roughly half of the overall administrative budget.

She said she wanted answers about community services practices in general.

"There are thousands of comparable cases, the VandenElsen case is just the best-known," Ms. Godron said in an interview.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright © 2005 The Halifax Herald Limited

ANDRE: Speculations #1

At this point, Carline and Larry Finck are in jail awaiting sentencing for accusations stemming from the way they defended themselves against a barbaric and highly dubious apprehension order filed by the CAS and signed and authorized by a judge. Mona-Clare is still orphaned as a result.

With as much compassion as we can, as much faith in human goodness as we can still find in us (or is it a NEED to believe in that goodness), intertwined with mercy and grace, and the certainty that truth exists, there is still a need to be have that truth uncovered. No court judgement can completely put an end to the questions we have.

This is not a technical equation, an exaction from law poured like concrete into a court judgement, but it is about complex actors of a human drama. As Shakespearian as can be, the case of Carline Vandenelsen and her children delivers a tale of treason and betrayal, abuse of power and malicious intent, disinformation and scheming, unrighteousness and the condemnation of the wrong person by the law.

Reading and studying King Lear, Othello or Macbeth, we dive in the dark pools of the conflicted human psyche, and find tormented figures, souls for whom the end justifies the means. We find these souls embolden by the success of their deceptive tactics when dishonor cloaks its subjective and abusive rulings over the lives of others, under the guise of political necessity by a third party, unwittingly tied to evil by the necessity of its own societal symbolism.

Justice in our world does not mean righteousness. It means shrewdness in interpreting the law. For good or for bad. But what can we do when things are so, that the cold sword of the judicial system is used to cut the umbilical chord prematurely and without regards for the lives it hurts, nor understanding for the tenderness and vulnerability of human nature.

Hence, here I find myself opening the books to find the chapter that describes the day before the storm... and find an intricate web of speculations which could each lead to a common lair... and to be fair, the following has to be ascertained:

IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT WE DISCOVER IF THIS situation has been orchestrated by people from Ontario, if anyone close to Carline and her children involved in past legal battle are behind this, if either one of them placed the call to the CAS five days before Mona-Clare’s birth. IF SO, then we have a totally different case, a totally different story. And the whole country has been played like we was fools.

If it is so, it would now mean that this is a case of conspiracy to destroy the lives of 7 people: Larry, Carline, Mona-Clare and Mona Finck (she died during the standoff of a heart attack), and Peter, Gray and Olivia, Carline’s children now living with her ex husband.

IF IT IS SO, that those people (they know who they are), or anyone else connected to them, has set in motion a series of tragic events by issuing an accusatory statement, which they knew would be taken seriously, not because either parent has ever been found to be unfit, but because they have been involved in high profile cases, then if they did so, he, she or they would have to answer to criminal charges ranging from: conspiracy to use deceit in order to keep Carline and Larry away from Carline’s 3 children; conspiracy to use law enforcement and governmental resources to kidnap a baby and break a family for personal gain; leading to the death of Mona Finck; leading to the use of governmental officers and Emergency Response Unit to further a personal agenda having nothing to do with the best interest of the child which is being apprehended; endangering the lives of the 4 people present at 6161 Shirley Street in Halifax from May 19th to May 21st ; endangering of the whole neighborhood. These are criminal offences: public mischief, and I suspect there could be more charges.

Therefore we also request that a PUBLIC INQUIRY be made, so as to reveal the source of the apprehension order against Mona-Clare Finck. Failure to pursue this avenue would leave our justice system prey to ill intentioned individuals using the law to commit crimes against Canadians, and amount to justifying those crimes against Canadian using the law and the Family Law Privacy Act to hide and protect the perpetrators from accountability. Those who know something should come out and speak.

FURTHERMORE, the true nature of Carline VandenElsen’s acts regarding the absconding of her triplets to Mexico would certainly have to be examined with this new evidence, in this new light, as this would show that indeed there was serious and decisive intent on the part of said parties to deprive the children of any contact with their mother. It would also prove beyond doubt that he has been active in disinformation and character assassination for many years, trying to paint Carline as a criminal and crazy person who represents a danger for her children.

FURTHERMORE, the whole public would have to be reconciled with the fact that they have been played as well in this case, the victims of a diabolical plot to exert a petty vengeance using any means necessary, as they have been swallowing camels and filtering flies. And for those with enough integrity, it would be hoped that they would restore publicly the ones they have attacked publicly.

FURTHERMORE, the children should all be returned to their mother, and Carline's assets returned to her, and damages alloted to her for the years of victimization and irreparable harm she and her children would have suffered at the hand of these confused people.

I am just speculating here. But that’s all the judicial system would leave us with at this point, as long as they do not investigate the case of Mona-Clare Finck in a public manner. But it looks really strange to me, an outsider, that this whole scenario would unfold 4 days before the birth of Mona-Clare, shortly after the children were told by a friend that Carline was expecting a baby girl any day now.

In good conscience, we will keep asking for a public inquiry and a reform of Family Law where it is needed, a law that allows this sort of thing to happen: the apprehension of a unborn child, and the right of Canadian parents to refuse to be mentally assessed by a court-appointed specialist when there is no reason in their mind to do so. They had a birth to prepare for, and a new life to welcome, a family to build and a little girl to educate in the ways of love, community, and in the ways of the world…

Andre

ANDRE: Adoption and foster care

Here is an excerpt from a Reader's Digest online debate in 1999. Visitors to the site were invited to give their opinion about the following question: "At what point do you think a child should be taken permanently from his or her parents and placed in foster care or adopted by others?"

The case presented to them concerned Robert, a 2.5 years old boy found wandering the streets in Vancouver, his mom a drug addict. Robert was brought back home and left with his mother for another 6 years with the obvious results that he suffered terribly. His mother was ordered to attend "parenting courses" but of course, crack does not help you study and be attentive to your life and those around you.

"A second parenting course didn't help: One night in August 1988, his mother kicked Robert out of her apartment. "I can't go home because my mom has company," Robert told the social worker who investigated. He went into care briefly but was returned to his mother in early September."

And so the result was more confusion, more hurt.

"From October 1988 to June 1989, Robert lived in four different foster homes and went to three different schools. The chaos and uncertainty took their toll: He became unruly and difficult to manage. Regarded as a troublemaker, he was placed in a group home with kids as old as 14, although he was just six."

Says the couple who finally adopted him: "Robert was eight when he became available for adoption. He didn't find a family until he was almost 12. Why did he sit there for four years? Why the heck did they drag it out like that?"

Here is a case where the CAS acted, but the family-court judge and the ensuing crowd of judicial officials handled his case in a way that does not address the particular nature of family bonds and life development. Something was definitely wrong.

"Maggie, a Toronto foster mother of three young children, says: "Canada should be ashamed of itself for the way it is treating its children. They should be getting the best of everything there is in this country. Instead they get the scraps. I hold society responsible for not knowing what's going on, for not being outraged that children are living in these conditions."

In many cases, children at risk are helped by the intervention of the CAS. And it seems that here is the suspended bridge over the abyss. Once a child has entered the "system" and is being "processed" (yikes) there seems to be very little the CAS or the parents can do. The "process" has to run its course, independantly from the laws of nature and bonding. And the "process" has everything to do with the judicial system.

"After reading the article "Canada's Foster Care System" I felt I needed to contact you to relay some of my concerns with the article. First of all I feel the title is very misleading, as the tragedy doesn't lie with the C.A.S. or the Foster Care System, but with the judicial system. It is there that decisions are made as to what happens to these children and whether they should be returned home or not, not in the office of the C.A.S. or the home of the Foster Parents."

So here is the thing: Once a child is into the processing channels of the CAS apparatus, he/she disappears from view. The child is an anonymous person, the case is secret and protected by the Privacy Act, and nobody in the public (families, friends, supportes) can know what's happening with that child. The only instances that can do anything at this point to either return the child to his/her family, or take that child to the next step of custody, are the judicial ones.

So what happens in the case of errors, where the child was not at risk, had never been, and the order actually concerns "fears of future harm," a preemptive abduction by CAS workers? The answer is that it's too late. We can only hope and pray that there would be a good and quick inquiry done to determine the validity of the apprehension of a child, and that the judicial personel will be thorough and impartial to reputation, religion, race, gender, social status.

In the case of a mistake by CAS workers or the judge, the child will still be swallowed out of view by the judicial system, placed in foster homes, eventually even adopted. The time frame for the proceedings is very precise and restrictive. You are encouraged to find a lawyer that has YOUR best interest at heart, because the judicial system has ITS own best interest at heart: to apply the law as legalistically as possible. And every CAS office seems to have their own legal team as well. It's VERY protected.

Once you're in, YOU'RE IN. It is impossible to get out. The best interest of the child then becomes to find a temporary home (foster care) and ultimately a good and loving family. But always by using the best interest of the law, not of the child. Even if it has been found that children have been taken away from their families without proper cause, the law cannot seemingly be changed. The child will remain out of his/her family.

It would be interesting to have data that would show us the number of children taken from their families each year, and out of that, how many actually went back to their families. And measure that across age groups.

Because there is a bigger demand to babies and toddlers, when a child is introduced into "the system," will he/she be prepared for adoption much quicker than other age groups? Some could feel offended at that suggestion and I would understand. However we have to ask, because if that is the case, then that motivation could possibly blind the administration of justice and open the door to abuse on the part of judicial and family-court personal.

When one listens to the stories told by parents concerning their ordeal with the CAS and family-court, a reform of family law seems to be badly needed in Canada. I'm sure the same-sex marriage issue will bring this to the fore pretty soon when they apply for adoption.

Finally, consider abortion: judges sign apprehension orders under the present Family Laws allowing the apprehension of babies by the CAS while the baby is still in the mother's womb.

Those who support abortion say the fetus is not a human being until "it" is born. The judge signs an apprehension order to prevent future harm to a human being, not an "it." At that point, doesn't the fetus become ward of the State? How can the fetus be treated as a ward of the State if "it" is not human yet?

I'm just processing this idea, not sure how far I'll be able to go with it, but it's certainly an interesting dilemma...

Andre

ANDRE: Trafficking in Persons?

The question has been asked many times: is there a relationship between the "casual" and arrogant abduction of children on the part of the Children's Aid Society and where those children end-up? We live in a scary world...

We understand the CAS does have legitimacy in many cases of family abuse. What is blurred is the important number of families broken apart unecessarily. Now, we do know that not all CAS personel are evil. That the CAS does good as well as bad. But in this case, and because of the many stories we heard, we have to ask:

What really happens to babies and children that are taken away from their families without any valid reasons? Many parents don't know how to fight and just resign themselves to the fact that they lost their loved treasures. And that is very sad. The abuse of power can go a long way without seeming evident...

But why would the CAS need to make up stories to get children away from their families? Why work so hard at breaking up families? Can this be one of the answers? Is this what could be going on? We didn't want to believe the Butter Box Babies story. Are we going to let this one go uncheck? We want to know where Mona-Clare Finck is today...

Whistle-blowers wanted!

CAS workers should come forward too in order to help clean-up this mess and restore the reputation and original mandate of the CAS to an efficiency that will not be compromised by corruption. Make sure you seek the protection of trusted authorities before coming out, and contact the media as well. That way, you stand a better chance not to be silenced through intimidation.


Read on and while you pray this is not happening in Canada... accept it: it is... That's why we need to ask more questions to our elected officials for them to order a public inquiry in the actions of the CAS in the case of Mona-Clare Finck, and by extension, into other children's as well.

Trafficking in Persons

Definitions
Trafficking in persons is a serious crime that involves:

- the movement of people across or within borders;
- threats or use of force, coercion and deception;
- and exploitation, whether forced labour, forced prostitution, or other forms of servitude.


Trafficking in persons is not migrant smuggling. Smuggled migrants are usually free once they arrive at their destination; trafficking victims are not.

Trafficking in persons has been described as a modern form of slavery. It is a serious human rights violation and is reported by the United Nations to be the fastest growing form of transnational organized crime.

The Government of Canada is working to combat trafficking in persons both domestically and internationally.

Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children, Supplementing the United Nations Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime

Article 3
Use of terms

For the purposes of this Protocol:

(a) “Trafficking in persons” shall mean the recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. Exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs;

(b) The consent of a victim of trafficking in persons to the intended exploitation set forth in subparagraph (a) of this article shall be irrelevant where any of the means set forth in subparagraph (a) have been used;

(c) The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of a child for the purpose of exploitation shall be considered “trafficking in persons” even if this does not involve any of the means set forth in subparagraph (a) of this article;

(d) “Child” shall mean any person under eighteen years of age.

SOURCE: Department of Justice Canada

BRAUER: Open Letter to Canadians

Seized 5 mo old nursing baby by NS Swat team on the apprehension order of CAS, approved by NS Supreme Court May 21/04

June 13, 2005

Open Letter to Canadians: No Babies Allowed in NS!

Dear Canadians,

There is a terrible crime happening in NS. Parents are at risk of having their children snatched, unlawfully, by the Children's Aid Society.

They have an incredible government support system and they are unaccountable to anyone. First they apply for an apprehension order of your child based upon the most vague and illogical reasons, "possible future harm." (Gestapo tactics) This is the one size fits all loophole excuse to torture and terrorize the family. Then they submit this application to a judge who routinely rubber stamps the order. (Gestapo tactics)

Next, a psychological evaluation is ordered, but wait, there's more! The psychologists are all employed by the government. What does that tell you? Refusing a biased evaluation is reason for seizure of your child because you are uncooperative.

Next step is to engage the police, SWAT Team, who will first stalk your house and family and then bash in your door in the middle of the night to forcefully snatch your baby. (Gestapo tactics)

If you resist, you will be arrested, tasered, abused and confined. The baby will be taken anyway and you will never see her/him again. (Gestapo tactics)

This is exactly what happened to a NS couple, Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck. First a little history.

Carline and Larry lived in Ontario. They both lost custody of their previous children because our Supreme Courts routinely, during a divorce, designate one parent the custodial parent and the other parent the non custodial parent. From that moment all parents are no longer parents of their own children. A non custodial parent will never be able to make a parenting decision again as that right has been removed from them.

In Carline's case her triplets were removed from her care and awarded to her ex husband. She was given very limited access to her own children for no apparent reason. We have the children and Canadian judges raise them. We must now ask permission from a judge for everything. Our Family Law System is barbaric, cruel and unconstitutional but they have the power. They refuse to implement equal shared parenting.

Carline VandenElsen couldn't bear having no contact with her triplets, as the judge threatened to do. She took matters into her own hands and abducted them to Mexico, where she enjoyed a special time with her children.

Eventually she was caught and returned to Ontario. She was acquitted on all charges, based upon necessity. At this time however, the crown is appealing the verdict.

Despite accusations to the contrary, Carline VandenElsen never had any dealings with the Ontario Children's Aid.

Larry Finck had a baby daughter. When the mother died, the mother's brother was awarded custody of the child despite the father's application for custody.

The child went to live on the Indian reserve and the father would never have custody of his child again. It was even difficult to see her.

After a scheduled visit with his own baby, Larry Finck did not return the child, siting that the child was in danger. The courts didn't see it that way and denied custody and access to the father.

Carline and Larry met in Ontario and married. They moved to NS believing that they could start a new life here, in quiet NS. That was not to be. Upon learning of her pregnancy, the NS Children's Aid Society, got involved and kicked it up another notch. They issued an apprehension order of the fetus, claiming " possible future harm".

The Children's Aid has a checklist 14 reasons to apprehend a child. Not one of the 14 reasons was applicable so they used their catch all reason. There was no abuse or neglect and they even had a glowing family doctor's report of their excellent parenting skills.

After the birth of the baby, the judge rubber stamped the order without any investigation, without any consultation, without any home visits, despite the mandate of the Children's Aid to keep families together.

When the baby was 5 months old and nursing from her mother's breast, ( babies only food source) the SWAT team bashed in their door and attempted to seize the child. The alarmed parents refused. After a 67 hour standoff, during which time the grandmother died of natural causes, the couple gave up. The baby was seized, the parents tazerd and pushed to the ground. They were arrested and confined. The precious mother's milk was never collected for the baby.

The baby hasn't been seen since and it is now more than a year later. This was supposed to be temporary. A year is long term. The courts are now in the process of making a decision regarding permanent care, permanent removal of their child forever. This couple is very vocal in their disgust of government. This and this alone is what has caused the seizure of their child. It is now a punishable crime to voice opposition to government activities. (Gestapo tactic)

During the standoff a gun was fired, a warning shot, while the police were bashing in the front door of the family's home after midnight. (Gestapo tactics)

Carline VandenElsen was subsequently charged with firing the weapon even though no DNA was found and no gunshot residue was found. Strictly conjecture.

Larry Finck, charged with firing the gun and abducting his own child, has already served a year in jail. Again no DNA and no GSR was found. Strictly conjecture. What happened to " innocent until proven guilty?" Why is an innocent man in prison for a whole year?

Both parents are charged with abducting their own child. How is that humanly possible?

Carline and Larry are now confined in the Central NS Corrections Facility awaiting sentencing. They have been denied envelopes, stamps, medical treatment, a better mattress, communication with each other, their legal files and documents, phone privileges and legal council. Larry Finck has been denied bail several times, the reason stated that he is at risk of flight. Why are murderers and pedophiles out on bail and not a father protecting his own family?

At no time was the baby every provided with legal counsel. During the criminal trial the couple each had legal representation but they subsequently fired their lawyers. They felt they were not working in their best interests. They asked for legal representation during the permanent care hearings but were denied. They wanted a lawyer who would work for them exclusively and not the integrity of the court, a required condition of all lawyers.

Carline is ready to die. She has given up on ever having justice. She has been on a hunger strike, starving for the children, since May 21/05, the anniversary of the seizure of her baby. She has demanded a Public Inquiry into the corruption of this case and all the other apprehension orders of the Children's Aid. They have repeatedly asked for their Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to be upheld but not one court has upheld them. Section 7 of the Charter guarantees "Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of the person, and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principals of fundamental justice." Section 7 of the Charter guarantees the life, liberty and personal security of all Canadians. It also demands that governments respect the basic principles of justice whenever it intrudes on those rights.

Where are Carline and Larry's rights? Who will uphold them? Who will compensate them? Who will release them? Who will return their baby? Who will come forward and rally to their defence?

No one is safe in NS! Babies and parents are not safe anymore. At any time of the day or night, the CAS can unlawfully snatch your child. They already did!

In the meantime, Nova Scotia’s politicians arrogantly refuse to hold a Public Inquiry. The NS Ombudsman refuses to get involved.

Why? What are they hiding? The flow chart shows no less than twenty two separate entities profiting from the seizure of this child. All expenses are paid for by the taxpayers. A family at home costs the taxpayers absolutely nothing. Seizure of the child invokes 22 separate groups of civil servants and private organizations that must be paid. This is costing the taxpayers millions and millions in uneccessay expense.

We, the people, and Carline and Larry, have a right to a Public Inquiry. Call it now, or resign Premier Hamm and AG Michael Baker!

There is something else happening here that is very strange. There appears to be a blanket censorship on any information regarding this situation. Some media and the community have refused to allow information to get through. Even the local schools don't want anything to do with the truth. Libraries, schools and book stores refuse to take Carline VandenElsen's book. (Gestapo tactics) This case affects every single person in NS and in Canada. This is not the only case. We hear many horror stories everyday, all across Canada.

Carline and Larry have many supporters who have been working 24/7 for a Public Inquiry. However, the justice system is content to just let Carline VandenElsen die in prison and to continue supporting the snatching of healthy babies from their parents.

In this letter, we have identified certain actions as Gestapo tactics. This is no accident. A comparison of Hitler’s actions regarding the snatching of children by their CAS is identical to modern NS and Canadian tactics. Your child could be next! Evil is here!

Our elected civil servants are no longer working for the people but actively working against them. They are engaged in a Political Coverup that rivals Ottawa’s Ad Scam.

We are asking for all interested parties willing to support the release of Larry and Carline and in favour of a Public Inquiry to come forward. Please call us at
902.798.5267 and leave your name and phone number. Fund-raising in progress.

Donations welcome.

Live Free!
Connie Brauer and Vic Harris

Family Civil Rights Movement
NS, Canada
902.798.5267 ( Office hours 9-9AST-1 hr past EST)
cbrauer@lincsat.com

http://justiceforparents.blogspot.com