And now:[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Date: Sun, 21 Nov 1999 22:05:30 -0500
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Lynne Moss-Sharman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Judge overruled in custody case, Labrador
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
JUDGE OVERRULED IN CUSTODY CASE
BY WILL HILLIARD
The St John's Newfoundland Telegram 11/21/99
A ruling by a provincial court judge that sent two small Inuit children back to their
home, ignoring an expert assessment that it could put them in danger of neglect and
sexual abuse, has been struck down.
Newfoundland Supreme Court Justice David Russell overturned the controversial ruling
by Provincial Court Judge James Igloliorte Oct. 28, sending the fate of the two
children, aged 5 and 2, back to provincial court.
Russell ruled that Igloliorte “did not accord paramountcy to the best interests of the
children in deciding to return them to the supervised care of their mother,” and that
the mandatory guidelines prescribed in the Child Welfare Act “were not addressed.”
On Dec. 9, 1998, Igloliorte denied an appeal by the provincial director of child
welfare for permanent wardship of the children, returning them to the supervised
custody of their mother for a one-year period.
Dysfunctional family
The mother they were sent back to was reportedly a neglectful alcoholic, who failed to
quit booze even after seeking treatment. The father, whom he ordered to have no
contact with the children, was a two-time convicted child sex abuser who sought no
treatment but maintained contact with the mother.
“These are Inuit children and I would state that the case plan says they need to know
their aboriginal culture and heritage,” Igloliorte said.
“The relative merits of adoption, I think, is at this present time going to have a
longer detrimental negative effect on the children if we ignore the ability of (the
mother) to try and pick up, not where she left off, but from a new beginning of trying
to be a sensible mother.”
Igloliorte, who presides in Labrador, was unavailable for comment.
Five children
On Nov. 16, 1995, at 11 months old, the eldest of the two children was taken along
with three older siblings from their parents on the grounds they were being neglected.
The other children were 11, 9 and 4. The temporary wardship was terminated Dec. 7,
1995, but the children were apprehended and taken into custody again on Jan. 13, 1996.
On Jan. 30, 1996, one of the older siblings complained to a social worker that her
father had sexually assaulted her. He was subsequently charged and convicted of sexual
interference on April 2, 1996, his second conviction of a sex offence against a child.
On March 6, 1996, the three older children were placed with their biological fathers.
The other child remained in the custody of child protection.
After the release of the youngest children’s father from prison in August 1996, the
children’s mother became pregnant with the youngest of the two children named in the
Igloliorte decision. On June 10, 1997, when she was one day old, that child was
apprehended by child protection from the hospital because of neglect.
In a July 1997 report, Dr. Dennis Kimberly said that given the multiple levels of risk
to the children, he agreed with the director of child welfare’s actions to apprehend
the children, with restricted access by the mother and little or no access by the
father.
“If significant behavioral, emotional, cognitive, relational and situational changes
are not made, are not sustained, and are not verifiable, within six to 12 months,”
Kimberley had told Igliolorte in court, “then, in the best interest of the children,
they should be placed in permanent care. There would be no more remaining clinical
rationale to pursue family reunification, that could justify giving the parents more
chances to put the children at risk.”
He testified that his suggestion for a six-month to one-year postponement of permanent
wardship was based on his understanding that the mother was planning to enter an
alcohol rehabilitation program, that the father was to take sex-offender treatment,
and that both parents were committed to seeking counselling for issues including
parenting.
During a review of wardship on Jan. 27, 1998, the director applied for permanent
wardship of both children, which the parents opposed.
At the trial, some months later in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, Kimberly recommended
permanent wardship of the children based upon the parents not having made the changes
he recommended. The mother did go through the alcohol rehabilitation program but there
was evidence that she resumed drinking shortly after, he said. There was also evidence
that the parents did not regularly attend counselling.
Igliolorte had the father removed from the case as a respondent.
Last week, child protection advocate Kathleen Kufeldt said government has to do more
to monitor the safety of children, and to create new programs for parents who may have
trouble coping with the demands of an infant.
Opposition Justice Critic John Ottenheimer said Friday that while child custody cases
are very complicated, one thing is certain: “The whole test of child custody cases is
what’s in the best interest of the children, and if that legal test is to be applied,
government has to take a view that it must do whatever is possible to deal in the best
interest of children. They can do that by providing the services and the personnel and
providing the assistance to families in need and who obviously suffer serious social
problems.”
"Let Us Consider The Human Brain As
A Very Complex Photographic Plate"
1957 G.H. Estabrooks
www.angelfire.com/mn/mcap/bc.html
FOR K A R E N #01182
who died fighting 4/23/99
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.aches-mc.org
807-622-5407
For people like me, violence is the minotaur; we spend our lives
wandering its maze, looking for the exit. (Richard Rhodes)
Never befriend the oppressed
unless you are prepared to
take on the oppressor.
(Author unknown)
