A Canadian woman said she is ashamed to be a Canadian

[Shwa]

Personally, I don't like the idea of taking kids away from their parents because it is against nature. When a child is taken, psychologically it is harmful not only to the parents but also to the child. I think CAS should more concentrate on effectively instructing parents how to properly educate their children, not simply take the child to a "better" family "for the child own good". Though in some extreme circumstance, such as the parents who have been proved having some mental problem and may seriously hurt their children, the children should be taken for their protection.

Good points, xul. So let's try and get this back on the rails. Firstly, human rights conditions in China have absolutely nothing to do with this thread, other than to put down and attack when real argument fails.

Secondly, there is a need for child protection laws in Canada, absolutely, and there is much good work done by the CAS no doubt. But I know people that have tangled with the CAS and their legal machine and the CAS is not as altruistic as they portray themselves to be. They are a child protection agency, for sure, but they are also a bureaucracy.

So let's talk about the 2008 case of the Manitoba woman whose child was removed from the home due to a swastika that was drawn on her arm. Human Rights abuse or not?

[kimmy]

Good points, xul. So let's try and get this back on the rails. Firstly, human rights conditions in China have absolutely nothing to do with this thread, other than to put down and attack when real argument fails.

Rest assured, human rights conditions in China have absolutely everything todo with this thread. The original poster makes a full-time job of trying to convince people that our rights and freedoms here in Canada contrast poorly with those in the Glorious People's Republic.

Whether it is complaining that stupid law does preventing industrious Canadian from earn money by perform surgery or build house or wire electrical without permit, or whether it is how stupid law prevent adventurous Canadian entrepreneur from put healthful melamine in food product, or whether Canadian produce epic genocide far greater than Mao because millions aboriginals killed by smallpox, bjre is here on a mission, and his mission is about China. (I am personally skeptical that he's actually "here" at all, btw.)

We're dealing with a guy who argues with sincerity that there was no massacre in Tienanmen Square, because most of the protesters were killed before they actually got to the square. Is it worthwhile to attempt a good faith discussion with a guy like that? Cruise though some of his earlier threads on the subject, and you get no attempt at a discussion, just a series of anecdotal evidence.

That said, this is a legitimate issue, even if bjre's efforts aren't.

Secondly, there is a need for child protection laws in Canada, absolutely, and there is much good work done by the CAS no doubt. But I know people that have tangled with the CAS and their legal machine and the CAS is not as altruistic as they portray themselves to be. They are a child protection agency, for sure, but they are also a bureaucracy.

So let's talk about the 2008 case of the Manitoba woman whose child was removed from the home due to a swastika that was drawn on her arm. Human Rights abuse or not?

In the earlier thread on the subject it was mentioned that while the swastika was the headline-grabbing aspect of this case, the parenting in this home was highly dubious even without the white supremacist aspect.

There's two sides to that. The first is, maybe this case received undue attention from the school and the authorities due to the white supremacist aspect. It might be that another case where a child was in the hands of equally poor parents goes unnoticed because she didn't do anything as attention-grabbing. We would have to ask ourselves, in which case did the system fail a child? The one who got taken away from shoddy parents because the swastika grabbed the attention of her school? Or the child who was left with shoddy parents because nobody at the school noticed anything? I think that's a difficult question, and one that we can't really address without having knowledge of the surrounding information.

And that's the other side: the white supremacist aspect of this case grabbed attention that's not typical for this type of story. We don't really know much about a "typical" case where a child is taken out of a home.

-k

[Shwa]

School officials called social services in March after the girl showed up with what police call "hate-related drawings" on her body, including a swastika. Child welfare workers removed the girl and a 2-year-old boy from the woman's Winnipeg home. The government is now asking the courts for permanent guardianship of the children.

Human Rights abuse or not?

The issue of shoddy parenting is indeed a complex one including who decides what "shoddy parenting" actually means. Well I am sure there is a standard government checklist about that, but each case worker has their own interpretation based upon their own experience. However, according to the story, the flag was raised only after the child came to school with "hate related drawings on her body." Is that reason enough to remove a child from the home?

[Muddy]

I would like China supporters to enlighten us why there is a shortage of women in China? Chinese women seem to be in short supply for young men looking for mates.I know why but I want to hear the apologists for Red China explain it.

[bjre]

I would like China supporters to enlighten us why there is a shortage of women in China? Chinese women seem to be in short supply for young men looking for mates.I know why but I want to hear the apologists for Red China explain it.

I don't answer this question in this thread because it is off the topic and because you are not able to provide a persuasive argument on this topic.

[GostHacked]

Even if it was her fault (but actually it was not), she still is a human being.

Do you mean if CAS got some testimony, they can take away all her human rights?

Does anyone perfect here. Did you ever do something wrong? So your human right can be taken away due to your im-perfect?

If your kids are taken away from you here in Canada, there is a damn good reason why it happened. If you endanger your kids and not respect their basic human rights, what makes you think this mother has any moral ground to stand on? Mind you I am speculating here.

But we need more back story on why she thinks this way.

[GostHacked]

I would like China supporters to enlighten us why there is a shortage of women in China? Chinese women seem to be in short supply for young men looking for mates.I know why but I want to hear the apologists for Red China explain it.

China had (may still have) a one child policy. If you want to keep your family name live, then you wanted a boy.

[Oleg Bach]

Our woman are now so liberated that they behave like whore mongering males of yesterday...and they are all miserable..not to mention not being able to have a natural and healthy relationship with a man..our woman are falsely empowered and embittered to the point of not being females but "its"...not all of them--- but remember..they hate woman in the western world....What happened to the good old days when you would meet..have sex an hour later and move in together and raise children? WHAT'S with all the problems and mental plus sexual social dysfunction going on these days? No wonder this woman wants to go to a simpler place where one does not have to be alone..and "independant"?

[bjre]

Good points, xul. So let's try and get this back on the rails. Firstly, human rights conditions in China have absolutely nothing to do with this thread, other than to put down and attack when real argument fails.

That's a good point. Some people did that just because they are unable to give any persuasive arguments.

Secondly, there is a need for child protection laws in Canada, absolutely, and there is much good work done by the CAS no doubt. But I know people that have tangled with the CAS and their legal machine and the CAS is not as altruistic as they portray themselves to be. They are a child protection agency, for sure, but they are also a bureaucracy.

Yes, there are children need to be help. But I suspect how much help CAS did overall. Most what I heard, and what I find are negative. The problem they created is most likely larger than the problem they solved. Any if they believe they did a good job, why they fear Ontario Ombudsmen to investigate complains? It is a private company, so it is no doubt that profit is their ultimate goal.

So let's talk about the 2008 case of the Manitoba woman whose child was removed from the home due to a swastika that was drawn on her arm. Human Rights abuse or not?

There are people already sum up about this:

In Canada, you're allowed to have your own political values. But you're not allowed to teach those political values to your kids unless those values have been approved. If you're a parent that teaches "non-approved" political values to your children, the state feels they have the moral obligation to take your children away from you.

Edited April 6, 2010 by bjre

[bjre]

We're dealing with a guy who argues with sincerity that there was no massacre in Tienanmen Square,

There was no massacre in Tienanmen Square, that is what I said.

because most of the protesters were killed before they actually got to the square.

I never said that. I said some people killed due to violence riot.

In the earlier thread on the subject it was mentioned that while the swastika was the headline-grabbing aspect of this case, the parenting in this home was highly dubious even without the white supremacist aspect.

There's two sides to that. The first is, maybe this case received undue attention from the school and the authorities due to the white supremacist aspect. It might be that another case where a child was in the hands of equally poor parents goes unnoticed because she didn't do anything as attention-grabbing. We would have to ask ourselves, in which case did the system fail a child? The one who got taken away from shoddy parents because the swastika grabbed the attention of her school? Or the child who was left with shoddy parents because nobody at the school noticed anything? I think that's a difficult question, and one that we can't really address without having knowledge of the surrounding information.

And that's the other side: the white supremacist aspect of this case grabbed attention that's not typical for this type of story. We don't really know much about a "typical" case where a child is taken out of a home.

-k

It has been clearly show in the video of post #84 (

) Edited April 7, 2010 by bjre

[Moonbox]

That's a good point. Some people did that just because they are unable to give any persuasive arguments.

No. It because you brainwashed China man and try to persuade us with made up lie. Hard to trust anything you say.

Yes, there are children need to be help. But I suspect how much help CAS did overall. Most what I heard, and what I find are negative. The problem they created is most likely larger than the problem they solved. Any if they believe they did a good job, why they fear Ontario Ombudsmen to investigate complains? It is a private company, so it is no doubt that profit is their ultimate goal.

It has been clearly show in the video of post #84 (

)

When use Youtube videos to prove points, shows how stupid your argument is. Shows you have no proof and not understand how to argue well.

[bjre]

No. It because you brainwashed China man and try to persuade us with made up lie. Hard to trust anything you say.

I think you are brainwashed by corporate media here.

When use Youtube videos to prove points, shows how stupid your argument is. Shows you have no proof and not understand how to argue well.

The YouTube video (

) is from a video that had been broadcast on TV, you can contact Ezra Levant who was in the show to confirm. Edited April 6, 2010 by bjre

[Moonbox]

I think you are brainwashed by corporate media here.

Millions China Man/Woman move to Canada/US and tell their stories (not Red Chinese stories but real stories). I hear China stories from Chinese students all time.

Few Western Man/Woman move to China, because not really allowed. Red Chinese don't want free people living there. We no want to anyways though. Rather move to South Korea or Japan.

The YouTube video (

) is from a video that had been broadcast on TV, you can contact Ezra Levant who was in the show to confirm.

If you want me click your link, explain what it say first. If not, it just pointless link.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Moonbox

[kimmy]

Human Rights abuse or not?

The issue of shoddy parenting is indeed a complex one including who decides what "shoddy parenting" actually means. Well I am sure there is a standard government checklist about that, but each case worker has their own interpretation based upon their own experience. However, according to the story, the flag was raised only after the child came to school with "hate related drawings on her body." Is that reason enough to remove a child from the home?

Again, while the swastika might have raised the flag, it appears that there were other factors that resulted in the child being taken from the home.

IF the white supremacist views were the ONLY factor in the child being taken from the home, then I think that it is an abuse of power.

It's difficult to see how anything remotely positive could come for this child from being taught white supremacist beliefs at home. It is likely that instilling those values in a child will impair the child's ability to succeed at anything in life. It's doubtful a child raised to be a neo-Nazi will ever contribute anything of value to our society. It's hard to stomach the idea that a parent should be allowed to push a child in a direction that's a surefire guarantee of failure. I find it troubling, and I feel badly for that child.

However, I think this is a slippery-slope type situation. If you can take kids away from neo-Nazi parents, what about other values we don't care for? Like, that mosque in Vancouver that was caught teaching that Jews are swine? If parents are taking kids to that mosque, should they be taken away too? Religious kooks who make the womenfolk live a shed during that time of the month? Luddites? Communists? 9/11 conspiracy kooks? Trekkies? There's a real argument to be made that these sorts of parents could be hurting their childrens' chances of being successful in life.

But improving a child's chance of being successful in life isn't supposed to be the objective. Protecting children from harm is, and that should have a strict and literal meaning, not a subjective evaluation of value systems.

There was an argument presented in bjre's video that the child was being put in danger because she might have been beaten up by people who don't like Nazis. Fair enough, but you could make the same argument in regard to a boy whose parents send him to figure-skating class. Taking away someone's children because other people might object to what you're teaching them is the definition of mob rule.

-k

[M.Dancer]

I'm too lazy top google the story but I seem to remember the Swatikas were the straw on the camels back and there were other factors involved...

I agree though, if it was the only factor, it would be a case of the state overstepping their bounds.

Turns out I am not so lazy...

The parents, who are now separated, are also accused of failing to provide adequate care for their children. Lawyers and social workers have told court there were problems with the parents related to drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, criminal behaviour and mental health problems.

Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/05/27/mb-custody-hearing-swastika.html#ixzz0kQVgg6P0

Mental health problems....ya think?

Edited April 7, 2010 by M.Dancer

[Shwa]

I think the CBC uses very interesting language in that story:

The custody case, which started Monday, has garnered international attention and sparked debate over how far parents can go to instill beliefs in their children, and how far the government should go to protect children from those beliefs.

The parents, who are now separated, are also accused of failing to provide adequate care for their children.

If the swastika drawing was the straw that broke the camels back, then I think that devalues drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, criminal behavior and mental health issues as reasons for the concern of protecting children. As if to say that, you know, drugs and booze, violence, crime and craziness are OK, but drawing a swastika has gone too far. The rest of the problems seem to be an afterthought, a backup just in case their swastika investigation went south on them.

[kimmy]

If the swastika drawing was the straw that broke the camels back, then I think that devalues drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, criminal behavior and mental health issues as reasons for the concern of protecting children. As if to say that, you know, drugs and booze, violence, crime and craziness are OK, but drawing a swastika has gone too far. The rest of the problems seem to be an afterthought, a backup just in case their swastika investigation went south on them.

As I said earlier a couple of posts ago, it's hard to guess whether this child would have been removed if not for the hate aspect of the story.

The swastika obviously brought the scrutiny in the first place.

As well, it's quite possible that the workers who evaluated the situation were prejudiced, hoping to find reasons. Would the degree of substance abuse and conflict between the parents have been characterized as dangerous to the child if it had been party-loving hippies having marital troubles instead of neo-Nazis? These are subjective evaluations, and it seems likely that most people's view would be swayed by the Nazi aspect.

I'm not sure it's fair to speculate that the parenting issues were afterthoughts in the decision to remove the children, however, even though the article frames it that way. They were clearly an afterthought for the reporters who wrote about this case, but it's not a given that the same can be said for the social workers who made this decision.

-k

[M.Dancer]

They were clearly an afterthought for the reporters who wrote about this case, but it's not a given that the same can be said for the social workers who made this decision.

-k

Quite. What editor would bother to make a local story national if the thrust of the story was couple with drinking, mental health issues had a child removed? What is special about that? I'm sure it happens fairly regularly.

Now a story about a mother who drew swastikas on her child's arm to send a message to the school....now that is unique.