Treating and Preventing the Pedophile

I don't usually just link to an article but today is an expiation. A rather thoughtful piece on how we should approach and treat the pedophile is seen in this article on slate.com.

Child M Case in Edmonton

The Court of Queen's Bench in Edmonton rejected arguments to keep an abused child on life support. The parents, who are presently incarcerated facing charges related to the abuse of the girl and he twin sister, appealed to the Alberta Court of Appeal. The appeal was dismissed and that court ordered that medical staff should disconnect the life support in 24 hours. The family then sought to have the Supreme Court of Canada hear the case. This too failed.

According to The Globe and Mail the child has now died as a result of the cessation of the life support systems.. Charges against the parents may well be upgraded as a result of the death.

The crucial element for the child protection systems, is that the courts looked at the best interest of the child as the crucial basis upon which to make the determination. The court is reported to have concluded that the child was suffering on life support and had no apparent hope of returning to a productive state.

Media reports suggested that the parents argued that they should be making the decision. In essence, that is an argument for the best interest of the parents who claim that there desire to keep her alive was based on religious grounds. By siding with what was in child M's best interests, the courts have again affirmed that the priority of the child when parental and child's rights are in opposition. This certainly doesn't mean that will always be the result in all cases but it does continue to uphold an important principle.

Justice Ross of the Court of Queen's Bench stated in her decision at paragraph 66,

"From the perspective of that general societal understanding, the evidence in this case that

it is in M’s best interests that life-sustaining treatment be stopped is clear and uncontradicted. A large number of specialists have been involved in her care, and it is their unanimous recommendation that treatment be stopped. M has no awareness of her surroundings and is completely dependent on mechanical supports to live. The unchallenged evidence of the doctors is that she will never regain consciousness and be interactive. The evidence is also that she will require invasive treatment, imminently, in the form of a tracheostomy, simply to be maintained on the ventilator, and that she will continue to contract pneumonia or other infections, and may require further invasive treatments in response. There is no potential benefit to her from these treatments, as they will not improve her current condition."

She adds at paragraph 72:

In considering this submission, I keep in mind that my role is to consider only the best
interests of M, not those of her parents or any other person

The full decision, only 15 pages, can be found at the Alberta Courts Website 

Phoenix Sinclair Inquiry

While there is much evidence yet to come in the Manitoba Inquiry into the death of Phoenix Sinclair, one piece of it that emerged last week has an all too familiar ring to it. It is one that we have heard in so many of these inquiries in various countries - case loads that were too high. In this case, the social worker who was testifying spoke of initially having 40 cases to manage - an impossible number.

However, the worker goes on to explain that more than the case number, is the number of children being managed. She described that you could cut the caseload in half but still face over whelming demands with families that have high numbers of children.

Maybe it is not the number of cases that should be considered but the number of children that should be the gauge of what is too many.

Yet two fundamental problems would persist - 1. not enough social workers are being drawn into child protection work and 2. retaining those that are is challenging with high caseloads, complex needs and limited resources with which to work.

One hopes that as Justice Hughes works his way through this inquiry that he will look at some of the core issues facing child protection and social work. There will be more to think about as the evidence unfolds.