One More Way for Government to Get the Kids

New Ontario Law Allows Gov’t To Steal Kids From Parents Who Oppose “Gender Identity”

By Rachel Blevins

Ontario has just set a startling precedent with the passage of a new law that could lead to the government seizing children from parents who oppose the “Gender Identity” agenda.

Bill 89, the 2017 Children, Youth and Family Services Act, passed by a vote of 63-23 on June 1. The new law will have jurisdiction over child protective services, and adoption and foster care services.

One of the most notable parts of the bill is that when it comes to the state’s process for deciding which home a child should live in, it takes out the consideration of “the religious faith in which the child is being raised,” and replaces it with the child’s “gender identity” or “gender expression.”

Differences include: the current Act includes the child’s cultural background in this list while the new Act Chil the child’s cultural and linguistic heritage; the current Act includes the religious faith in which the child is being raised while the new Act includes the child’s race, ancestry, place of origin, color, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.

Jack Fonseca, senior political strategist for Campaign Life Coalition, warned that the new law does not just affect parents who are facing the risk of having their children seized by the state, it also affects parents who are looking to adopt.

“With the passage of Bill 89, we’ve entered an era of totalitarian power by the state, such as never witnessed before in Canada’s history,” Fonseca said. “Make no mistake, Bill 89 is a grave threat to Christians and all people of faith who have children, or who hope to grow their family through adoption.”

Another troubling aspect in the new Ontario law can be found in what the government determines to be the “least disruptive course of action.” With Bill 89, it argues for the use of “prevention services, early intervention services and community support services.”

The least disruptive course of action that is available and is appropriate in a particular case to help a child, including the provision of prevention services, early intervention services and community support services, should be considered.

In a press release on the new law, the Ministry of Children and Youth Services described the legislation as helping “children and youth across the province thrive and reach their full potential by strengthening and modernizing child, youth and family services.” It noted that the law will put “a greater focus on early intervention, to help prevent children and families from reaching crisis situations at home.”

John Sikkema, a lawyer with the Association for Reformed Political Action in Canada, criticized the bill’s clause, and said that it could do more harm than good to a child when applied.

“You can imagine a situation where, say, a child’s teacher suspects that a child is gender questioning or something and they’re not being supported in that,” Sikkema said, noting that the teacher would then “actually have a duty to report certain things to a Children’s Aid Society who would look into it further.”

As The Free Thought Project has reported on multiple occasions, the United States has its own share of problems with Child Protective Services seizing children from families whose beliefs don’t align with the state.

However, the idea of basing a child’s safety in a home off of his/her “gender identity” sets a troubling precedent in the province of Ontario, and takes legal government invasion in the home to a new level.

Rachel Blevins is a Texas-based journalist who aspires to break the left/right paradigm in media and politics by pursuing truth and questioning existing narratives. This article first appeared here at The Free Thought Project.

Advertisements

ANNALISE RICE INTERVIEW

Communities Digital News

Annalise Rice, 19, describes her Family Court nightmare

Richard Gardner’s controversial Parental Alienation Syndrome (PAS) theory was invoked in a heated Minnesota case.

IT’S HALF-PAST GET OUT!

What is a GAL? A Guardian ad Litem is an advocate for a child whose welfare is a matter of concern for the court. In legal terms, it means “guardian of the lawsuit.”


IN ESSENCE, STATES ARE INCENTIVIZED BY FEDERAL GRANT MONEY  TO CREATE SITUATIONS THAT DON’T EXIST TO GENERATE THESE FUNDS.  
   Everyone wants a piece of the federal funding pie, so you have federal, state and local government agencies, non-profit and faith-based organizations, private foundations and corporations all working together to support the efforts of these programs. We don’t need government to intervene in families and then have adults and children abused by the very system that is designed to protect them. The majority of the time, parents are in the best position to represent the interests of their children
Read more about grant funding: Healthy Marriage-Responsible Fatherhood & Faith-Based Grants…We Know What the Game Is!

Proposal: If the deficit is not funded, services to children need to be reduced by 8%. There are several considerations to be aware of in discussing which children no longer receive guardian ad litem services. Because of the Federal mandate for abused and neglected children in juvenile court, both congressional and legislative agreement would be required to remove this mandate.  Additionally, the guardian ad litem is independent from the child welfare system and often may be the only person who is assigned to the child from the beginning of the case through permanency. Eliminating mandatory guardian ad litem appointments in dissolution/custody cases would be particularly troublesome in pro se cases where the parties are proceeding without legal counsel and would greatly complicate the work of the court. (Um, I don’t think so!)

2016-17 Biennial Budget (Click to View)


Children at Risk: Foster Children’s Rights Ignored

Getting off a school bus, heading home for an afternoon snack and sitting down for homework.

McKenna Ahrenholz doesn’t complain about an average afternoon.

She has much more important ways to use her small voice in an effort to make a lot of noise.

“As early as I can remember I was in the system,” she wrote in a letter to lawmakers explaining her life while she was caught in Minnesota’s flawed child protection system. “I have been punched, starved and neglected.”

They’re big words to come from such a small person. At just 12 years old, McKenna is fighting for the thousands of foster kids across the state who don’t have a voice.

Because, in Minnesota, they’re not always given one.

“No one would listen that we wanted to stay at grandpa and grandma’s,” the letter continued. “The people who make the laws like yourselves need to hear us children who are the ones going through such a crazy life.”

McKenna and her four siblings have a lengthy history with child protection in counties all across the state.

Click to read more and view the video.http://kstp.com/news/children-at-risk-foster-childrens-rights-ignored-child-protection-mckenna-ahrenholz-childrens-law-center/4303701/


State Lawmakers Move Forward on Bill Aimed at Giving Foster Children a Voice 

March 09, 2017 06:53 PM

State lawmakers moved forward Thursday on a bill they hope will give abused and neglected foster children a voice.

The proposal stems in part from a 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS investigation that found examples of juvenile victims forced to fend for themselves, despite state law saying they’re entitled to a lawyer.

The piece featured 12-year-old McKenna Ahrenholz, who testified Thursday in front of the Minnesota House Civil Law and Data Practices Policy Committee.

Click to read more and view the video: http://kstp.com/news/minnesota-house-bill-ron-kresha-state-legislature-aims-to-give-voice-to-foster-children/4421376/

 

After 20+ Years Minnesota Guardian ad Litem Board STILL Working to Improve Complaint Process

Minnesota, Jan. 2017:  The Board that manages Minnesota’s GAL program has absolutely failed to address serious issues that have put children’s live at risk, caused children to be placed in the custody of unsafe parents and then be re-abused, and contributed to families being torn apart and children, estranged from parents…as documented in complaints raised by parents. 

Families have been coming forward for 20+ years to raise complaints about individual Guardian ad Litems in regards to unprofessional conduct, and conduct that violates their mandated duties.

Many concerns have been raised about the use of guardians ad litem. Most complaints have centered on guardian actions in family court cases, primarily in contested divorce actions. Complaints have focused on guardian bias, lack of oversight and accountability, inadequate training, and inappropriate communication between guardians and judges. Parents have also complained that there is no place to seek relief if they have a problem with a guardian.” GAL Executive Summary (95-03) February 28, 1995

Continue Reading: https://acalltoactionblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/20/mn-gal-board-complaint-process/


Click on links below to view e-mails sent to the Attorney General, Board on Judicial Standards, Minnesota Office of the Legislative Auditor; MN House Reps, the State GAL, Sheriff, Congressman Tom Emmer and others.

GAL Jean Hariman FIRED

Atty. General