Reports? How did one become plural?
And the cops never acted for what reason? No proof?
Last edited:
Victim blames Children’s Aid Society for years of abuse by guardian
- Thread starter SLM
- Start date
And the cops never acted for what reason? No proof?
I don't know, I wasn't there.
The combined file speaks volumes though, obviously.
What it boils down to is they failed her, and she has every right to take them to court and address that failure. To try to pass it off as the fault of people who had no control over the situation.... a mother stripped of all legal rights, imagined 'selfish' foster families.... is ridiculous. CAS had direct control over that girl.
What reports? The red ***** and skinny?
That just screams child sex abuser does it?
That just screams child sex abuser does it?
Right, you weren't there and there was no hard evidence of sexual abuse. Where the hell do you get the foster families being selfish?
With that logic, why not apply the same 'punishment' to the CAS case workers and disallow them from working with the agency?
... I'm guessing that this would not sit well with the victim as it does nothing to provide her with any comfort... That said, if the punishment isn't good enough for CAS, what makes it good enough for the Mom?
Your statements that selfish people are to blame for her not having had a better home to go to.
And yes, the combined files should have been a warning flag to look into what was going on with these kids. She deserves to take them to court and make them answer for their failure to protect her.
That happens all the time.... people found unsafe or unreliable to work with kids are fired every day. But there are also times where people are found truly negligent or criminally complicit. I don't blame her one bit for wanting to take this to court and root out what was going on in her case. For all we know it could have been mere oversight, or it could have been worse. I think she and the kids who come after her, deserve to have it examined.
All I'm saying is that this same standard must be applied to ALL parties involved (excepting victims of course). The bio mother qualifies as a direct party in my eyes.
Agreed, quite enthusiastically in fact
I really don't get how, once stripped of contact and legal rights, you can view the mother as legally responsible for the placement of the child.
The very same applies to CAS once they have placed the child.
Would you feel that applying the same punishment to CAS as was applied to the mother as fair?
It is not the same. CAS never gives up control over the child unless there is an adoption. That child is in their system, under their protection, even when in a foster home. Those children had case workers whose job was to ensure that they were safe and well. Foster care is not the same as adoptive families.
Noooooo. I said selfish people don't want to take in foster kids causing a huge shortage of homes.
There was only 2 3rd party reports. 1 for under feeding and the other for her red vag. She obviously never told the babysitter what was going on or the cops would have nailed him right then and there after a medical exam.
She chose not to open up and reveal what was going on. This created the lack of evidence needed fo0r charges. Why did she wait so long?
Because she'd been in his home, suffering his abuse, since she was 2 and didn't know any better.
But hey, let's blame the victim shall we?
Isn't it the mom and dad's job to care for that child?.. A full-on legal responsibility?
I'm looking at the macro view here. Sure, what you say about CAS is the case, I don't know the legal details, but if a legal argument can be made against CAS, you can bet that an even stronger one can be made against the bio parents.
Why doesn't this happen?... Answer: the gvt has waaayyyy deeper pockets than dysfunctional biological parents with sever addiction issues.
CAS is an entity of the province whose job is to oversee the safety of the kids.
They will be taken to court as being the ones who were in direct control of her safety and care while she was in his home.
It is a mom and dad's job to care for their children.... until the government strips you of said rights and says they can do it better.
The gov can't take your kids away, stick them in abusive homes with drug addicted criminals, and then turn around and hold you liable for their **** ups.
Why is this even an issue? It's black and white. The court case was against the guardian.
As for CAS they are legally responsible and for good reason:
Children and Family Services Act
And they were likely paying him while he "just" starved them and repeatedly raped her
Can you find some legal explanation of how the government can strip you of your legal rights to your kids AND still hold you legally responsible for them at the same time? You keep saying it, but I can't find anything that backs it up.
No they aren't. They are not a govt agency. Where did you get that idea?
The Children's Aid Societies (CAS) of Ontario, Canada, are independent organizations empowered by the Ontario government to perform child protection services. The declared goal is to "promote the best interests, protection and well being of children".[1]
Their principal goals are to:[2]
- investigate reports or evidence of abuse or neglect of children under the age of 16 or in the society's care or supervision and, where necessary, take steps to protect the children
- care for and supervise children who come under their care or supervision
- counsel and support families for the protection of children or to prevent circumstances requiring the protection of children
- place children for adoption
How can the cops impound a vehicle?
My bad, they are the entity the government uses.
Can you show me where they are not legally responsible for the children in their care?
The question comes down to this:
Why is the same standard of punishment NOT being applied to ALL parties.
Abuser goes to prison
CAS probably sued for financial damages
Bio parents had children taken from them.
ALL parties are complicit, so why are there 3 different forms of punishment being meted-out?
Or send someone to proson