Children's Aid Society of Ontario profited from the exploitation of my children

CAS profited from the exploitation of my children

Please use my case above as reference. CFSRB even listed the case law within mine to justify siding with us parents. In my case CAS still withheld documentation and lied. They lost again and now they are refusing to provide answers despite being ordered. So I have put it back in the lap of CFSRB and said...well now what?


I have asked them to waive confidentiality so the entirety of everything may be published to expose the manipulation. In my case CAS aided and abetted my ex in an International Child abduction and covered it up and did not follow the rules. Then once everything was in place they worked with her to take away my rights which prompted a 3.5 year legal battle to restore my rights and force Canada to Acknowledge the originating US jurisdiction. I had to get a written letter from the Ontario Central Authority acknowledging my US divorce order thereby proving all actions were illegal as my joint consent was ignored. So trust me. I want them exposed as badly


Canada uses another term. An accessory. So an example. Since CAS and my ex wife profited from the exploitation of my American Children by violating international law. My ex is the violator of human trafficking but the accessory to the crime the CAS is equally
As culpable under the Criminal Code of Canada

In response to my last CFSRB can you believe that the CAS had the audacity to claim that they have no obligation to inform my American children of their rights but only have to follow the child protection standards of Ontario.

 The standards first of all are a guideline and no law. The UN Charter of Children's rights is a ratified treaty just like the Vienna convention. Which CAS acknowledges per case law. So my solution. File a lawsuit in US Federal Court and let CAS explain to a Federal judge why they are violating the rights of Americans.


Then CAS says well mom consented. Oops well when the cops go to talk to the kids they did not get consent....and violated once again the UN Charter of Children's rights. Keep in mind The government is a legal third parent to all kids in Canada. That is how CAS gets away with this due to their mandate. Where they messed up is not observing my American children's rights and I already had a court order which the Central Authority retroactively Recognized. Making all of it illegal.


- - - 

INTRODUCTION

[1]        J. S., the Applicant (the “Applicant”), filed an Application pursuant to section 68(5)  of the Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.C.11, as amended, (the “Act”) on October 3, 2014. The application was in regards to the Internal Complaints Review Panel (the “ICRP”) processes conducted by the Sarnia-Lambton Children’s Aid Society (the “Society”) during the year 2014, and the outcome of these ICRPs. 

[2]        As a result of the Pre-Hearing held on November 14, 2014, the Board determined that the issues to be heard at the hearing would focus on the ICRP process pursuant to section 68(5) of the Act.  As well, the hearing would review whether the Society has heard the Applicant and provided him with reasons for decisions for certain issues that were not dealt with satisfactorily at the ICRP, pursuant to section 68.1(4) 4 and 5, as follows:

• Complaint A: that the Society did not follow the appropriate time frames with regards to the two ICRPs held so far;
• Complaint B: that the Society is not properly providing access visits to which the Applicant is entitled;
• Complaint C: that until very recently, the Applicant was prohibited from attending his children’s sporting events during his access visits;
• Complaint D: that in the communication with Society staff, they are not interested in hearing the Applicant’s views on issues of significance, and that reasons are seldom provided;
• Complaint E: that the Society refuses to provide the Applicant with disclosure of the contents of his file.

[3]        A hearing of these matters was held on December 4 and 5, 2014. The applicant was not represented by legal counsel.

[4]        The Board’s reasons for this decision and its orders follow.


Full Source:
canlii.org/en/on2/2015cfsrb52.htm



- - - -  2 - -

Indexed as:              J.S. v. Sarnia-Lambton Children’s Aid Society

(CFSA s.68)

INTRODUCTION

[1]        J. S., the Applicant (the “Applicant”), filed an Application pursuant to section 68(5) of the Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O., 1990, c.C.11, as amended, (the “Act”) on June 29, 2015. The Application was in regards to the Internal Complaints Review Panel (the “ICRP”) process conducted by the Sarnia-Lambton Children’s Aid Society (the “Society”) on May 27, 2015 and the summary of the ICRP outlined in a letter dated June 12, 2015. 

[2]        Following the Pre-Hearing teleconference held on September 8, 2015, the Board determined that the issues to be decided were whether the Society heard the Applicant and provided him with reasons about the following concerns all of which had been raised in the ICRP:

A)   Supervised Access – why supervised when court and voice recordings from Society workers said unsupervised;

B)  Official explanation of redacted copy of emails;

C)    Children’s rights violated;

D)   File disclosures;

E)   December 9, 2013 supervision note stated we would encourage the mother to get custody of the children and the Applicant would be the access parent;

F)   Society’s obligation to advise the Applicant’s children of their rights as [Country] citizens;

G)   Delay in SKYPE visits with his children;

H)   Email contact with Society terminated; Society never used the 1-800 number that was established for contact purposes;

I)     Access visit for December 31, 2014 to January 1, 2015.

[3]        The hearing was held on October 27, 2015. The Applicant was not represented by legal counsel.

[4]        The Board’s reasons for this decision and its orders follow.


Full Source:
canlii.org/en/on/cm5pYQAAAAAB