40 thoughts on “Too fat to parent?

  1. Charles. I can’t use names but Child Services is a corporation in business to make money. They are paid by the child. They use children as leverage and will take them away if moms will not support CS. Child services workers lie on afidavids and to people to manipulate a situation. Police are making arrests with no evidance based on what Child Services tells them to do. If you are lower income and are innocent you probably have to plea bargan and take a guilty charge. If mom won`t say dad is guilty they will take children. Childrens best interests are not taken into consideration. Each child is money in their pocket. It seems like like the judges and police are all involved in this conspirace. These people have to become accountable. 45 minutes in the station is no physical evidance is not investivating.

      • that I am too tired to write the “proverbial letter to the editor”type response when I hear something I disagree with.

        me thinks the lady doth protest too much

    • Actually, the Federal government is the corporation and makes (collects) the money. It then disburses $35B/year to the provinces for Child Services. The provinces then spend, spend, spend, always crying for more. The only benefit to the Nation is massive employment numbers within all affiliated departments. Other than that, 100% agreement.

  2. I listen to your show regularly and generally find it to be thought provoking as well as balanced in its’ representation of issues.  On Monday, June 25′th 2012 I did not have the same experience.   

    I am a social worker.  Now this does not mean that I cannot hear negative statements about my profession.  To the contrary.  I try very hard to embrace those as opportunites for learning and for changing how we are experienced by others.  

    I do work in child protection in Alberta and have done so for the last four years.  I have nearly 20 years of prior experience not for profit organizations who work with children and families.

    I only heard a half hour of your program (130 to 2 PM Calgary time) while I was driving to court for my job.  

    During this time I recall comments likening social workers who remove children from their parents to legal kidnappers.  There were also loose references to terrorist behaviours and to persons who have no idea what they are doing…because they have only taken some courses and now consider themselves experts.  Then there were questions about who these social workers answer to and who gives them their authority.

    I was both saddened and appalled.  It is clear to me that there are a vast number of people who have had very poor experiences with child protection and for that I am sorry on behalf of my colleagues.  I do understand that many workers focus on the task to the exclusion of the process and I make it my mission to create awareness of the negative impact of this approach with my colleagues. I also try to create a different experience for the people on my caseload.  So…I am not going to yell and scream and say that it is not true…as to some extent…perception is reality…and your audience needs to be heard and respected for airing their concerns.

    I was surprised at your responses.  You did not do your usual good job at asking the deeper questions such as:

    how can we learn from this?
    where can people go to express their concerns to the government?
    are there any of you who have a different perspective?

    You also did not clarify roles and responsibilities as I usually know you to do.

    Please allow me to provide some of this information.

    In Alberta anyhow…child protection workers are governed by The Child, Youth and Family Enhancement Act.   

    We have a very specific mandate.  We do not have the same burden of proof that police do in criminal cases. This is to ensure that children can be protected in situations where there is sufficient information to indicate that the family may require support to ensure safety, security and development of young persons…but there may not be sufficient information for criminal proceedings and so on.

    With this difference there are both advantages and disadvantages. The advantages in erring on the side of caution are that we can intervene where needed. The disadvantages include that there will be some cases where families are unnecessarily stressed because investigations have yielded no need to open a file.  Other issues are that there will be vast differences in opinions as to what needs to occur to ameliorate concerns.

    In some cases there is a certain degree of emphasis/pressure from “higher ups” in the department to take intrusive measures that the worker may not agree with.   When this has happened to me I have to be clear that I have always had the opportunity to have a very thorough discussion and come to a conclusion that is agreeable to me.

    In other cases judges will disagree with the application brought before them by child protection and will vary it as per their powers of jurisdiction.

    With respect to the latter it is important to note that it is always the judge who grants an application.  It is NOT the worker or the department.  We do not have the power to do that.  

    As I noted…I do agree that some workers have a  ways to go in terms of the manner in which they process investigations and debrief and so on.  

    I do not agree that apprehensions are legal kidnappings.  There have to be sufficient concerns to warrant further inquiry.  

    Parents do have legal rights in these cases as do the children.  Legal representation is possible for all parties.  Parents can also call the Minister in their province and express concerns.  I have had several of my families do this and they are heard and their concerns are addressed.  

    There are many times where people who hear about concerns do not get all the information and child protection workers cannot release it.  

    I did listen to the interview on your website with the overweight father.

    It does seem as if he had a poor experience and that is most unfortunate.

    I also had some questions.  There were one or two comments he made which caused me to think that we do not perhaps have all the info.  

    But rather than focus on this case alone…I just wanted to write to provide you with some of my thoughts and to share that I was somewhat saddened and disappointed with your approach today.

    In closing I should also say that I have personally taken more than just a few courses before I “hit the road” as it were.  I have taken years and years of them. I also have to demonstrate continuing competency and in Alberta …if I do not do this…my licence is revoked….as in this province…social workers are licenced to practice under The Health Professions Act.

    I hope this information helps and I hope that you will not interpret this letter as one sent from a whiner or complainer or bleeding heart liberal (small l).  

    This is not my intention…and in fact I rarely if ever write these sorts of missives.  I am usually so very busy with my own life and with doing overtime to try to keep up with the demands of my caseload so that my clients get the help they ask for and or need…that I am too tired to write the “proverbial letter to the editor”type response when I hear something I disagree with.

    But this time…after a half hour of picking my jaw up off the car floor (remember I was driving to court while listening)…I just had to write.

    Please feel free to ask me any questions you may have and I will do my best to provide you with any information you may find helpful.


    Laurie   (MA,RSW)

    Child Protection Worker


    Citizen and Taxpayer of the Adler Nation

    • I must confess, I did not hear your show but caught a commercial for it that drew my attention.
      I have been following this story through other means.
      I work 12 hour night shifts so I rarely if ever write these sorts of missives.
      What I have noticed from this story and many more like it is the common thread.
      Man or women has child or children taken. They get angry that somone took their child. They calm down and try to reason with the worker to give their child back.
      The worker acts very friendly and begins to ask very leading questions. The parents who at this point will do or say anything to get their children back, answer the questions.
      A lawyer will tell you at this point. The best thing to do is agree with everything the worker has to say. Do whatever the worker wants you to do. Its the fastest way to get your kids back.
      The problem with this advice is that it depends heavily on who made the complaint against you.
      If a busy body teacher makes claims…its probably good advice but only in its the fastest way to get the kids back.
      The catch and this is the scary part. Social Services no matter what name they go under, don’t investigate complaints. They don’t have the training or knowledge how to properly investigate. ( How long does it take a police officer to become an investigator ).
      Once they take the child they are committed to justifying their actions by manufacturing the content of their “investigation” to match the complaint. If the complaint is malicious, you are hooped.
      It appears the story of the obese father is a case of a malicious investigation. It highlites how easy it is to be placed in this position and have a judge rule against you.
      Another common thread that is not so common is that this father went public. Others are starting to go public. The stories are all the same with a few of the facts changed around. When this happens and this is common, the PR departments of social services come out of the woodwork.
      I’m not suggesting Laurie is from the PR department. Some of the workers have been so indoctrinated into this system they actually believe this crap.
      They are being called the cult of secrecy for good reason.
      Although I can not comment on this father as i have never met him. I can testify that his claims and that of others about malicious investigation’s (my words) are all to real.

      Kevin (BS,DET,EC,TOR)

      Question all Child Protection Worker’s


      Citizen and Taxpayer of the Adler Nation

    • To have a discussion with a Child Protection Worker will typically turn out to be as productive as a disagreement with an ATM. Thanks anyway.

  3. So very sad, family court destroys children’s lives hiding behind the false pretense that there major agenda is children first.A family court Judge overruled the Doctor that testified that I have no physicological issues and on his own ordered me to see a Doctor for a year. This Judge never heard me speak a word and ignored that my X-wife was diagnosed with a mental illness (Bi-Polar). He simply decided on his own that I have issues I assume from just looking at me.I am well groomed, self employed, middle aged white male. No history of violence, mental illness nor any criminal record. Judges in family court have the power to self diagnose individuals without any facts or even the ability to ignore facts and make conclusions on ther own individual bias. Exactly what the court system is designed NOT TO DO. I feel the pain of this man as my story is so much more extreme in the bias and misjustice that one man (Judge) can express with no accountability for his actions. My story is one of accusations of abuse by a mentally ill mother with teachers, a doctor and friends willing to testify on there individual accounts of the abuse possibly occuring yet the all to obvious bias displayed by one man in court nolified any attempt to even attempt to even present the other side of this story. I wish this man abused by a flawed system the justice he deserves as a national media story can only bring and hope that it creates ripples within family court to help the thousands of dads that just want to be dads, love there children and give their kids a chance at happyness. This story literally brough tears to my eyes as not all dads are without emotion and feel not for their children, My experience is that like most moms the dads I know love their children above all else.

  4. With all due respect to the social worker that wrote in the child welfare services of Canada are a wholesale disaster. Alberta has had so many children murdered in foster care that one cannot even keep up to it, and worse, no one is ever fired for it. Additionally, many of those children should not have been in care in the first place.

    There is no oversight of CAS, Ontario is in particular a cesspool, the only Province worse is Quebec which has been riddled with child trafficking and illegal adoptions for ages.

    As to Ontario, the Ombudsman has wanted to have oversight of the CAS since 1975, yet these agencies fight this lock, stock and barrel. Why? What is so horrible that no one can overview them, and why are these agencies allowed to do whatever they want to with no consequences period.

    Are they bullies? You bet they are, and they are also child traffickers and kidnappers in the eyes of many. Also the level of abuse in foster care is simply horrifying, yet no one does anything about this at all. The bulls eye is only ever on natural families, never on those who foster, and especially those who adopt.

    Bill 110 was made for the Ombudsman to have oversight of the CAS, it is by far time for this investigative review to transpire. If you want someone to actually review them please call your MPP for this to be enacted.

    Child services were never based on child protection in the first place, the system was based on eugenics and a bias towards the poor and the working poor, it is archaic, it is inept, and it must change. This is an all out war on families for adoption brokers, and it is nefarious, evil and getting worse all the time.

    At least in Ontario time to bring it down, Ombudsman oversight is a first step.

  5. To Laurie,

    Problem #1 – I thought Charles was very thought provoking if not clear on his explanation about the legal implications to “represent this issue” even more fairly. A pity child protection work is done with such secrecy, I’m certain reputation goes a long way in an industry wrought with privacy laws, where the media can only report when a death occurs.

    Problem #2 – Your feelings about the work you do, also known as cognitive dissonance.

    Problem #3 – There is nothing to learn from this, except maybe Mean People Suck.

    Problem #4 – There is nowhere people can go to express their child protection concerns because all processes are conducted internally, by people on the same provincial government payroll (that would be you).

    Problem #5 – The different perspective is that child protection is a profession of nobility, one where saviors of children lovingly give starving children what they really need, and there is just way too much evidence to the contrary for someone as bright as Charles to indulge in such rhetoric.

    Problem #6 – You can describe all the details, conduct post forensic research analysis, appeal to authorities, and negotiate all you want about the proper way a slave auction should be conducted, or you can simply be unified in the belief that slavery is wrong.

    Problem #7 – The overweight parent had a poor experience that is most unfortunate…in your mind. To others, what has happened to him and his family, is criminal.

    Problem #8 – You write like a concerned Child Protection Worker, rather than a concerned Canadian parent.

    Thank you for your attention,

    • Well I thought I was writing like a human being. I really do hear the concerns. Didn’t you read what I wrote? I am saddened by people’s bad experiences. That is what I wrote. I am not trying to say that there are not flaws. I am just trying to say that some of us do care, some of us are trying to be sensitive and some of us are trying to help…well I am at least.

      I am a big girl…and I can take the insults…it is just that I wanted people to know that there are other sides to the coin sometimes…and that some of us hear our clients and some of really try to help.

      I am a human first, a mother and a wife second, a social worker next and so forth.

      And yes…mean people do suck.

      • To Laurie,

        I am not hurling ad hominem insults. I’m certain you are a lovely person, a devoted mother, wife and so forth…

        I have problems with the work you and your colleagues do. There is nothing smiley face or humorous, in my mind, about taking children away.

        Talk your good ol’ programs and services chow chow all you want, but I’m certain your testimony in court that day did nothing to “help” children.

        While I don’t expect you to agree, it’s my personal belief that anyone who has made a pledge of allegiance to the social sciences, is required to give up at least some of their humanity.

        What would you like to hear? Gratitude? Sympathy?
        Your profession relies on the apprehension of infants from hospitals, babies from homes, and children from schools to administer it’s own brand of “help” and “care”. I find that disgusting and unconscionable.


        • You make good points. I do not need a “good girl” pat on the back or anything. And lots of nites I lose sleep for sure. I wish sometimes I did not have to take babies from homes and hospitals. Sometimes I am so sad that I could not find a suitable alternate plan. I have even cried…but whatever…it is not about me.

          Sometimes I am sure I have done the right thing. I have seen some horrible horrible abuse of children…even babies that would make you throw up if you knew…and the moms and dads cry desperately and say that they are sorry… and I know they are…and yet I have to do what I have to do at the moment.

          You are absolutely correct…I lose a bit of humanity every day. So I try so hard to remember that and to do my utmost to respect that the parents I work with are people too and deserve fairness and humanity even if they have broken bones in their newborn baby. Then I try to figure out how to make things safer and better for the baby and the parents and try to avoid foster care being for good. Sometimes I even drive my parents to counselling myself because they don’t trust anyone else…or they are too scared to leave the house or whatever. My colleagues ask me why I do that…because I am not the one who needs the help. I lecture them about being human and trying to walk in someone elses shoes.

          Audrey I think you and I are on the same page for the most part.

          But I should say that I was abused and no one helped. I wanted police to take me out of the home. Back in the day it was enough where I grew up…for the dad to say…I won’t hit again…and voila…I was left in the house with a fearful mom and a drunk dad and no where to go.

          Now…I do not say that to get sympathy where none is needed. I just say that to tell you that I am willing to work with the ethical dilemmas and challenges I face every day in order to try to make a different experience for moms and dads and kids who are struggling. Sometimes I help. Sometimes I am sure I do not. But I worry about what things would be like if we only have the heartless ones doing the work…and yes…I agree…sometimes the workers are without conscience. I have daily struggles with that…and I take the opportunities I can to try to get them to see things differently.

          • To Laurie,

            You don’t have to take babies from homes and hospitals. It’s your job, it’s how you earn a living. It’s an order you receive and follow. If you quit, there are 10 people who will take your place. If you stay, you will have to live with your actions, and try to learn something from them. It is a game of risk you play with “other people’s” lives, but in theory, you do so of free will.

            You can not respect someone if you are treating them as less than yourself. Period.

            I assure you, we are not on the same page. I abhor the work you do. Not to be confused with you personally, as I do not know you. However, I do know that sleepless nights are not a good sign.

            This “different experience” you aspire to give to moms and dads and kids who are struggling is simply not an ethical dilemma for a clerk of the state to solve. It is presented to you as such and so you believe it to be true because it is validated by your colleagues, your commendations, and your pay check.

            For your love of counseling and psychology I direct you to Bowlby’s theory of attachments, or Stockholm syndrome, or Milgram’s experiments for some valuable insights. Then I ask that you save the (albeit real) broken bones stories of abuse for the police reports and those who enforce criminal law, not the far more common peddlers of anger management classes, in family law, where the overwhelming majority of “your clients” are to be found.

            For your love of the law, I direct you to the Federal Criminal Code of Canada for a very concise definition of Kidnapping, in addition to Torture, Extortion, Coercion et al.

            For your interest in medicine, I can only suggest you go to medical school before you make another mental health assessment and referral.

            You are but a cog in a machine. You work on a case by case basis, combating every known societal disease with quasi-correctional programs and services, that likely cause more damage than they were ever designed to treat. And you do it by force, not at all a feature of charitable intentions, and the very humble beginnings of social work. Child protection social work is defined by what it hates (the antithesis of love), and now obesity (a one time sign of wealth) is on that very long list.

            Hang your head in shame. There is little more than lip-service that you adequately provide in your work.




          • Please, do add anything you deem relevant to our brief dialogue for Charles, his fans, the obese man, or maybe even those children that have been taken away for further treatment and mandated processing.

            I mostly golf for a living. You must be confusing self-righteousness with an ability to read the writing on the cave walls, but you keep shouting in all caps, and I’ll keep listening. My guess is that you mostly watch way too much bad television in your quiet alone time.


          • why don’t you spend some of your time also helping these children when not golfing? there are lots of noble causes. i suggest just blogging is not enough. ps: golfing is a lovely activity. i am glad you are happy with your choices as i am with mine .

            and no…i do not watch bad tv. i read academic articles, pray, feed the poor children in my neighborhood, help stray puppies and donate unused golf clubs to golfers anonymous :) ….not…

            seriously…i spend time with my husband and my son and my dogs and i do read and sometimes i even turn on the evil tv :)

            but even if i did…what would that matter?

  6. Dear Mr Adler, I absolutely had to write in response, as I have for many of your child welfare related shows. First let me say that as an advocate for families being destroyed by child services in Alberta, this is not the first time, nor the last that they have stolen children from the hands of loving parents based on a discriminatory idealism. In Alberta, child services is owned by privately run corporations that, I assure you, are in no way nonprofit. There is no incentive to return children to homes that are fit and more incentive on taking children for every little thing, like as one of your guests said, at the individual workers discretion.

    The Prime example here is the case of Delonna Sullivan who by law CAN legally be named after her mother courageously fought to have the media ban lifted, an option that most don’t no they have or have little means to do. As we all know when its on the governments tab they have endless pockets. There was never so much as a complaint made to social services regarding Delonna’s care, and no apprehension order. Yet the worker just decided to take her since she was already at the residence to apprehend two other children from a different person who lived in the home. within 6 DAYS that baby was dead. Her mother Jamie, wasn’t even notified of her death until HOURS after . No investigation into the circumstances surrounding her death, and the foster mother has never been investigated by police even though the death was suspicious. Jamie and her family were lied to by workers and the whole thing was swept under the rug.

    I have seen MANY instances where parents are NOT given the benefit of the doubt and Child Services are completely exempt from following our Canadian Charter. Parents have no rights, a worker with a 4 year degree can arbitrarily , without evidence, convince a judge with hearsay, and separate a child from their parents for the next couple of years to the rest of their life. It is far more economical helping families while the children remain in their parents care, yet they seem to choose options that cost thousands of dollars more per month than supplying the family directly with resources. Like what you might ask? as a foster parent you are entitled to $195 / DAY for child care for your children and the foster children…. as a natural parent you can apply for a subsidization of around $400/ month – the average daycare is $700 / month/ child. yet for $195 / day I could have a live-in nanny! the average foster family in Alberta with one child gets $45000 a year in payments and reimbursements for expenses! NEVER do they spend that amount directly assisting families with resources or financial aide. if you have 4 disabled children in your care you could be eligible for up to $145,000 in financial aide and reimbursements! this is all over and ABOVE the legal costs associated with removing a child. How can anyone who cares about children say that the system doesn’t need improving? That would be completely naive. I want to see Jamie Sullivan and Velvet Martin on your show, they will set the record straight on how this system really works, or rather how it doesn’t. The system is killing children and tearing apart good families, what are you gonna do to stop it?

    Dawna, MOTHER, PN, Doula, Family Centered Care Advocate

    Also, a citizen and taxpayer of the Alder Nation!

    • I can say “the system” doesn’t need improving, it needs to be recognized for what it is, de-regulated, and then abolished.
      One horror story after the next is a pandemic.

      • How would you deal with the children who are severely abused at home? Not talking about the borderline cases…but the clear cut abuse cases where there are no safe extended family who can help?

        Curious Canadian

        • The severely abused children’s offenders should be investigated by the (police). The offenders should go to trial. If found guilty sent to prison.
          You will find that once offenders are displaced from society (not the children) their will be safe extended family more than willing and capable.

        • To Curious Canadian,

          How would I deal with the children who are severely abused at home? I wouldn’t. I don’t carry a gun and I don’t fight violent crime. However, I do know the difference between right and wrong and believe anyone who hurts children is always wrong. So I would just like to know what exactly is a “clear cut” case of severe child abuse in the home, what exactly is a “borderline” case of severe child abuse in the home, and what is a “frivolous” case of severe child abuse in the home (aside from an option you haven’t yet considered and would probably prefer not to focus on)?

          Or I could ask the question more directly like this:

          How would you deal with children who are kidnapped from home, held hostage, tortured, and ransomed to the highest bidder? Not talking about the divorce cases…but the clear cut abduction cases where there are no legal authorities who can help?


          • What on earth are you talking about? You are kind of going off on a tangent I think. Can you send me links to cases where in this country you have evidence of kids being sold to high bidders?? I have never heard of that.

            I just wanted to know what you suggest society or authorities do when a parent beats a child severely or sexually abuses them. I am not talking about what to do with the parent….but the kid…in a case say where…there are no family or friends who can help care for the kid??

            I think someone has to take care of the kids…and I am good friends with a gal who grew up in foster care and loves them very much and as an adult …invited them to her wedding and so on. It is not always awful…

          • OK…Tomatoes accepted….and now that that part is over…I really am curious as to ideas you might have for this dilemma.

            I thought this forum was for productive discussion. But if you work in absolutes then I guess we will not be able to exchange thoughts.

            Just interested in exploring this a bit more…that is all.

          • Very well then, I am not at all surprised that you don’t know what I’m talking about, probably because you seem to need a direction for the conversation that ends in you justifying the removal of innocent people (living breathing human beings) from their homes (the basis of all comfort and security), and I will not submit to logic that makes the four legged animals look more civilized than we!
            You want a solution to your problem? Reframe. Just my two cents.

          • Interesting….tell me more about this reframe idea. Can you expand at all? Now I am curious even more.

          • Sure, I’ll expand the reframe idea. I believe you (and the overwhelming majority of Canadians) are stuck in the “war on domestic violence” model. It has been around and developed since the 50’s and has always been a critical failure in that it not only attacks the many innocent, but misses or dismisses the many guilty. You can put up a storefront and call yourself a “protector of children”, but if protection means bringing armies of gun carrying soldiers into homes to stage surprise ambush kidnappings as a protective measure then you have to wonder how overzealous these “protectors of children” are going to be when they are obligated to go to court (all on The State’s dime)? I could go on with tales from the trenches, but the point of the headline titled “Too fat to parent?” was never about the abuse of this man’s children. I believe words like “loving parent” were used in this particular case and think this is just another (one of many) sad casualties of “the war”. And since I brought up the subject, I think the war on drugs has been just as futile as well. Have we all forgotten the perils of war? The innocent victims? Think about what you are supporting and remember, in theory anyway, this is peacetime in Canada, before you eagerly draw your sword.

          • Excellent…now if we could…just for a minute…move away from the gun toting soldiers…and expand on the alternatives to the “war on domestic violence” model…

            what might the new model look like in practical terms? it would likely be a peaceful model…

            who would do what and how?

            I like your points in terms of war on this and war on that…

            tell me more about the peace model….in terms of the actual who does what…at least in your thoughts…which are as valid as any…

          • Sure, I’m alright with that…just for a minute…pretend that there are no gun toting soldiers in Canada, who come into homes and take children away in the name of protection. It’s not very palatable to the public anyway, so let’s just ignore the facts, so we can get to work on a new plan. In the natural sciences it’s called isolating a variable of an experiment, in the social sciences, it’s really just an unethical manipulation to get the results needed for continued funding.

            You, my friend, are still so very stuck.

  7. The kidnapping of this mans children is just one of the ridiculous reasons child protection across this country use to take children.
    In family court the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt does not exist in family court. In family court the burden of proof is preponderance of evidence.
    This allowes workers and their professionals to perjur themselves. Judges are biased as many of them where employed with child protection before they became judges.
    The system across the country is corrupt for money industry.

  8. My name is kept out for fear of any type of consequence. I heard this show replayed over the holiday weekend, whilst I drove home from work.

    I am a single working mother of three. I have a very good job and make a decent amount of money. We live a very comfy lifestyle. My kids want or need for nothing.

    My 14 year old was diagnosed with ADHD many years ago. I’ve chosen to use non-pharmaceutical means of managing him. And we do just fine. He’s successful with school and social skills. My daughters, 8 and 3, both participate in varying classes of ballet and dance class.

    I work 12 hour shifts. I work very heavy hours to afford the lifestyle we have. It’s not uncommon to be working 60 hours a week. It’s just how it is with my scheduled rotation.

    I maintain a good balance between work and home by remaining involved with the kids in every way possible. I don’t smoke, drink nor do drugs.

    Sounds like an ideal situation, right? Did I mention that I am also obese? And I also play an online game.

    Does this mean that I will have to be looking over my shoulder, feeling guilty for partaking in something that I find to be very enjoyable, because some people disagree with gaming?

    This whole story is ridiculous. I sincerely hope that the unnamed man has his kids returned. What happened to human rights in this case? Isn’t this an attack based on discrimination? What will be next, coming after people like me who work such long hours? Honestly, surely that must cause irrepairable psychological damage to the children (said with sarcasm).

    For the Alliance!
    For the Horde!

    • Fear is so very powerful, and where child protection is concerned so very real. The unthinkable is not probable, but it is possible.

      Human Rights in Canada just celebrated it’s 30th anniversary and mostly came about concurrent with the end of Indian Residential Schools. A shameful blemish in Canadian History (from Stephen Harper’s own words), which was pretty much “repackaged” into the modern day foster care system.
      At least as a Nation, we can now claim to hate more fairly?! (said with sarcasm)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Disclaimer: The editor(s) reserve the right to edit any comments that are found to be abusive, offensive, or contain profanity.