Rebecca Millette

,

Provincial ministry removes 9-year-old girl with autism from family

Rebecca Millette
Rebecca Millette
Image

ABBOTSFORD, British Columbia, June 28, 2011 (LifeSiteNews.com) – On June 16, 2011, 9-year-old Ayn Van Dyk was taken from her family into custody by the BC Ministry of Children and Family Development, allegedly for her own safety, but against the wishes of her family, says her father.

Four days earlier, Ayn had been playing in the backyard of her family’s home in Abbotsford, British Columbia when she went missing.  After frantically looking for her, without success, her father called 911 and a police search commenced.  Ayn was found two hours later playing in a neighbor’s backyard.

“It seemingly was one of those storybook endings,” her dad, Derek Hoare, told LifeSiteNews.com.  “She ran from the police car and threw her arms around my neck.”

Derek Hoare is a single father of three children, two of whom, including Ayn, have been diagnosed with severe autism.  He says he has been the only parental figure in his daughter’s life since birth and the only person able to manage his daughter’s difficulties with autism.  Although Ayn has accrued the knowledge of a 9-year-old, due to her autism she has the naivety of a 3 or 4 year old.

When Child Protection Services (CPS) workers showed up at Hoare’s door on June 16 they told him they had a director’s agreement for taking Ayn into custody.

“They told me either you voluntarily hand her over to us or we take her,” Hoare told LSN. “You can’t claim it’s voluntary when you walk up to someone and say ‘Give this to us or we’re taking it.’ That’s not voluntary.”

“I don’t believe the government has the right to remove children from loving, caring homes,” Hoare said, adding he believes it is his job to protect his daughter and decide how to best keep her safe.  He said he doesn’t understand why the Ministry has taken her away from “the person who loves her best.”

Because Hoare refused to sign his daughter over to CPS, workers took her from her school later the same day.  Afterwards, Hoare learned that Ayn was placed in a “specialized hospital” for evaluation, as she was deemed unsuitable for foster care at the time.

“I fear this means my daughter is being drugged [because] she is very volatile and aggressive when she is outside the home,” said Hoare. 

According to her father, Ayn is “well-behaved” while under his care, “succeeding and excelling” in her family home, but still remains difficult to manage in a school setting or outside his care.  He believes Ayn would be unmanageable in a hospital setting where she would be fearful.

Meanwhile, Hoare has not seen his daughter, nor does he know how she is coping. 

According to Ministry protocol, a presentation hearing took place in court seven days after Ayn’s removal from her family.  At that time, Hoare learned the reasons the court gave for taking his daughter.

Citing situations from home and school that appeared detrimental to Ayn’s safety or that of her siblings, the Ministry indicated, according to Hoare, that while he was a good father to his children, he was simply too overburdened with their care as a single parent.  But Hoare contests the Ministry’s report, saying each situation highlighted either normal occurrences for an autistic child or behavior he has since addressed.

The hearing was adjourned to provide time for Hoare and his lawyer to examine the documents and prepare a defence.  They will not reopen the case until July 12.

LifeSiteNews.com contacted the Ministry for further information, but was informed that the Child, Family and Community Services Act protects specific details of the case.

In response to general inquiries, however, a spokesperson for the Ministry said the top priority is always “the safety and wellbeing of the child.”

“We recognize the stress of caring for a child with special needs places on a family – and we take each case very seriously,” the spokesperson told LSN. “The decision to remove a child is not made lightly. Wherever possible, our preference is always to find a way to support the family in continuing to live together. We would only remove a child if there is concern about the family’s ability to safely care for the child.”

“My number one concern is not getting my daughter back, but how she is doing right now,” said Hoare. “I have no idea where she is or how she is doing. I have not seen her and they have not told me.”

The situation, he said, highlights a concern of great importance to many BC parents with special needs children.

According to Hoare, the BC Ministry of Children and Family Development recently took over the management of files for children with autism in the province.  The Ministry additionally oversees the Child Protection Services, which is charged with the removal of children from their homes when the Ministry deems it necessary.  Many BC parents, said Hoare, are concerned that with the Ministry controlling both departments they do not accurately perceive the situations of families with special needs children.

In his case, Hoare says the Ministry obviously knew the entire situation with his daughter, as a result of overseeing her files, before they took her into custody. Hence, they would have known Ayn’s improvement, from non-vocal at 2 years old, to now, when she has mental abilities proper for her grade level - all skills she learned in her home, according to Hoare. 

“They knew this before they took her, so why did they take her?” asks Hoare.

“It is about Ayn for me here and I am emotionally invested here,” he added. “[But] this is no reason for the government to come and remove a child from the home.”

As a result of waiting lists and court protocol, it could be well over 3 months before Hoare has a chance to argue his case.  However, there is a possibility that she could be returned to her family outside of the judicial process during a “case conference” or meeting with lawyers and concerned parties.  Hoare hopes that in such a meeting, they might come to a decision to bring his daughter home.

For more information, visit the Facebook page dedicated to bringing Ayn home.

Contact information:

Honourable Mary McNeil
PO Box 9057 Stn Prov Govt
Victoria, BC V8W 9E2

Phone: 250 387-9699
E-mail: [email protected]

FREE pro-life and pro-family news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook