Childrens Aid Society

Child Trafficking – C.A.S. is a business

The most commonly used definition of human trafficking can be found in the United Nations Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons (1):

‘[T]he recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation.’

ImageThe exploitation comes into play in the funding model that has the government providing more money to the agency based on how many children they have in care.  This leaves the corporation looking to drive up numbers of children in care and to increase their needs.   Assessments and diagnoses requiring multiple medications or other special services have become a tool to secure more funding.  In many cases the children may not even receive these services but the agency is still provided the funding.

These assessments and diagnoses are big business for many professionals working in cahoots with the agency itself.  A doctor or psychiatrist working for C.A.S. has it in their best interest to side with the wishes or desires of their employer to ensure the success of their career and their continued employment.  The more they can assist C.A.S. in their endeavors the more they stand to gain financially.  This goes for any of the workers within the foster homes as well since the more kids they have in their care the bigger the paycheck and if they side with the social workers then they’ll undoubtedly be sent more children.  So if all these people are making money off the situation then who is paying the price?

The children and families they claim to be serving, along with the government, and the tax-payers are all victims of one of the most well protected, secret money making schemes in the country.

One doesn’t have to look far to find evidence of the improper use of government funds or to find evidence of their debt.  Despite constant coverage of their lack of funding new C.A.S. buildings are being built, lengthy court battles employ legal teams against people who are often self represented, and the endless parade of propaganda continues.  While it is difficult to ascertain much of the financials due to a lack of oversight or transparency on the part of the C.A.S. an audit by the Auditor General that took place in 2005/2006 highlights some of the misuses of government funds.  Luxury vehicles, all-inclusive vacations, unchecked spending, and unwarranted bonuses top the list of concerns regarding financials while much of the complaints process is mishandled or ignored altogether.

It is more then merely a coincidence that children most vulnerable to apprehension come from lower income families with multiple children and single or young parents.  These children are easy targets with the most potential to bring money in for the C.A.S.  Poverty creates an easy method for building a case of neglect and multiple children in the care of single or young parents make it easy to establish that the parents are ill-equipped to cope for a variety of reasons.  Since one of the most commonly used tactics for gaining crown wardship of children includes subjecting parents to complicated and drawn out litigation processes many of these parents lack both the education and the finances to stand their ground.  Faced with courtrooms full of professionals and experts so out of touch with their lifestyle that they appear to be from another world, they quite simply don’t stand a chance.

ImageOnce a crown ward these children can provide funding of a minimum of $30, 000 per child every year to the agency depending on how many different diagnoses they can pile on.  Disturbingly enough adoptive parents face nearly as many challenges and hurdles in the process of adopting a child as birth parents face when trying to keep their children, the difference being the potential foster parents often have more access to the  resources needed to succeed.  When looking at how the funding is set up to benefit the agency the most when providing for crown wards the numbers speak for themselves in regards to whether or not C.A.S. is more concerned with the money it receives from the government or the welfare of the families it serves.


4 thoughts on “Child Trafficking – C.A.S. is a business

  1. Qualifiedly, horse shit. I am not a CAS employee or a CAS Board member but I was both once and for a short time and thank God I do neither anymore because it was the most difficult work imaginable. Nothing can be so disheartening as having to separate children from parents. Is the system perfect? Nope but it’s what we got to protect children from neglect and abuse and to give them access to what they need, the protection and well being they deserve. If the author has a better idea, we are all jumping up and down to hear it. In my mind CAS is doing what families (as in the extended family kind) are responsible to do do but either can not or will not. If I was a family court judge you can bet the the court room would be packed solid for each and every case as I would ensure that subpoenas would be sent to each and every grandparent, auntie and uncle of every child and ensure they they fulfill THIER RESPONSIBILITIES instead of “over paid” workers. I suspect that the author would be spending more time in my court than at the keyboard. As for luxury cars, I was joking with a secretary at work the other day who drives a Cadillac SUV about secretarial salaries. She smiled and said, you don’t think I married a health and social service worker do you. Hello. Dear author, I would be pleased to call you every time I see a child who is abused or neglected in my neighbourhood which quite frankly is daily in my neck of the woods. Put YOUR MONEY where your mouth is. Every CAS has a volunteer program. If you can pass a security clearance which is probably questionable lets see you be the change you want to see instead of pointing fingers at others who are doing your “job” of protecting and providing for your community nieces and nephews.

    • Wow, you sound like someone with perhaps at most a BA who thinks they know the system from working in it as you say “for a short time”. Obviously you need to spend more time researching what really goes on inside CAS as clearly you are insulated from the realities of how they interpret their mandate. If you think I am uninformed, may I suggest you try to get a copy of their financial report as an example. They are a publicly funded organization, and are required by law to disclose such information but they refuse. It is my understanding that there is a case in front of the courts now to force CAS to disclose information, they are required to by law, but which they refuse to do. Before you make criticism of the Author I suggest you re read the blog. The Author did not state CAS workers were driving luxury cars, she stated that the auditor general raised a concern over the lack of transparency in some agencies. CAS is one agency that has little or no transparency and the potential for misuse is there.
      I have watched from the outside as CAS tears families apart due to an over zealous case worker, with no children, less than 30 years old, with little or no experience in family life. Such workers think that having studied 3 years in university to obtain a BA makes them an expert. Personally I think CAS needs to reign in some of these case workers as they cause far too much damage to families.
      If CAS is truly protecting children and supporting families why the lack of transparency? It does give one pause for thought does it not?

    • EDOS: Please forgive me for taking some time to respond to your comment as I wanted to formulate how best to address the many points you brought up. First and foremost I would like to thank you for taking the time to both read and respond to my blog. I don’t expect all feedback to be positive nor do I expect every person to agree with everything I say, obviously this would be a ridiculous stance to take. What I thank you for the most though is for being such a fine example of everything it is that the general public dislikes and distrusts so much in a social worker.
      You have entirely missed not just the point but also the tone of the article. I have provided a point of view based on pieces of collected information that I even took the time to provide links to had you had any real interest in educating yourself to what I was speaking of. You have taken it as a personal attack and an attack on social workers specifically yet at no point did I direct any of my writing towards social workers, rather, the agency they are employed by and the mechanisms by which it is provided funding. Never once did I suggest that social workers are over paid as truthfully, I have no interest in their salary at the moment. Your suggestion to “put my money where my mouth is” by perhaps joining one of the C.A.S. volunteer programs seems odd to me. Would you be willing to explain why I would donate my time, energy, or money to an agency that is corrupt to the absolute core? I find your thought process puzzling on this point.
      You seemed to suggest that I would be in the court room for court cases if you were a judge and that you find it questionable that I would pass any of the security clearances, when all you know of me is what I have written in a blog. I would find this level of assumption regarding my personality odd except you provide a shining example of the scorn, contempt and assumptions which so many other people have reported having to deal with while facing social services.

      In short you have skimmed over the article and the resources provided, taken personal affront, jumped to conclusions, described the removal of children from their family as “disheartening”, and personally thrown the ball back at me with a certain amount of hostility which I feel is unwarranted. A child losing their family for even a short time is not “disheartening,” it is an outright tragedy and it’s happening all to often. I don’t deny the need for social services however I feel the current model is unacceptable. Your point that I need to be the change I want to see is perhaps the only thing I agree with but I would like to point out that although you believe I spend all my time in front of a keyboard, which is partially accurate, you have zero knowledge of what any of my time is spent doing in regards to pushing for those changes.
      I find it odd that you suggest calling me every time you see a child being abused or neglected in your neighbourhood which you believe happens nearly everyday. Should these parents all have open case files and perhaps have their children placed in foster care as well because they are doing things that do not meet your standard? What is your definition of abuse and neglect? According to “duty to report” you are legally obligated to report all of these abuses that you see on a nearly daily basis and so I can’t help but wonder how much time you spend on the phone reporting other parents. It seems a tad over zealous, much like the activities of the Children’s Aid Society as a whole. Sounds like they did a fine job indoctrinating you as you appear to have no desire to believe anything beyond what you’ve been told.

  2. In my personal opinion, I think you have done a fine job of addressing some of the issues the general public have with “Children’s Aid Society.”

    The points of focus in this article are a few of the many flaws that are alive and well within the Society. Children’s Aid Society often drops the ball with critical cases that indeed require close monitoring; yet seem to “go after” parents that may possibly need, at best, parenting classes. I have personally witnessed case’s of severe child neglect due the negligence of social worker’s from children’s Aid Society. Social workers who failed to make home visit’s, consistently rescheduling, and failing to observe how badly some situation’s were deteriorating. Then when the travesty is discovered exactly when and where is the social worker held accountable for letting such situations carry on due to their professional negligence. I agree with the author’s admission for the need of such services and concur with the conclusion that it is indeed the mandate that is flawed and such interpretation there of.

    No one is making personal attacks against the social worker’s that are employed by the Society. I think what is being pointed out is that the system that is currently in place needs to be examined and in addition transparency is key in order for the public to have any kind of trust in this particular system. We are aware of the fact social workers are over worked, under paid, and that their case loads are very heavy to say the least. Statistical “burn out” rates show, it is a highly stressful career; another flaw in the system that one could make arguments for… why so little social workers for such a “high” demand? Who is held responsible when the “Aid” makes a mistake? (Jeffery Baldwin)

    I say to the author, continue shedding light on a dark corner of society.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s