22 replies to this topic

[Victoria Watcher]

John, 40, and Jade Ratchford, 38, say three police officers and four social workers turned up at their Victoria home at 10:30 a.m. on Feb. 22 in a scene they describe as confusing and chaotic.

John Ratchford was ­momentarily handcuffed, while six-year-old Oliver and his eight-year-old sister, who were being home-schooled at the time, were removed.

_______


Jade Ratchford said she and her husband of 15 years, who are unemployed and have physical disabilities, hadn’t yet taught their kids to swim.


https://www.timescol...ersight-8386371





The other article says he is the minister at some church and was arrested there.








The couple said they knew the school and ministry had concerns, but they maintain they were fulfilling their responsibilities as parents, supported by their friends and family.

The couple live on disability payments — the average monthly payments for a family of four is about $2,500 a month.

“There should be real supports for parents who need help before these things happen, right?” said Jade Ratchford. “Instead of giving out these pathetic food cards, maybe they could actually help poor families with the things they actually need.”

That help could include nursing assistance, visits to chiropractors, home support to help with cleaning, and counselling “to help and support and build these families up rather than tearing them apart,” she said.






She wants a publicly funded home cleaning service?

Edited by Victoria Watcher, 02 March 2024 - 02:34 PM.

[max.bravo]

Really interested to know what concerns the school and social workers had. These people definitely seem a little… “off”… and definitely poor. but are those good enough reasons to remove kids from their parents?

The mother insinuates the kids were taken because they are poor. Obviously more is happening, but what exactly?
https://www.facebook...mibextid=WC7FNe

[Seechelle1969]

3 social workers and 4 police attending a removal is unusual there must have been significant concerns to have that many responders. When I did that work I only took police of there was criminal charges or concerns of violence.

There are very specific conditions a social worker can remove under (see below) and is the absolute last resort. The social worker has to go before a judge within 7 days and report to the court on the circumstances of removal and the judge decides whether it is warranted. There is also a specific section that speaks to you cannot remove because of poverty.

When protection is needed
13 (1) A child needs protection in the following circumstances:
(a) if the child has been, or is likely to be, physically harmed by the child's parent;
(b) if the child has been, or is likely to be, sexually abused or exploited by the child's parent;
© if the child has been, or is likely to be, physically harmed, sexually abused or sexually exploited by another person and if the child's parent is unwilling or unable to protect the child;
(d) if the child has been, or is likely to be, physically harmed because of neglect by the child's parent;
(e) if the child is emotionally harmed by
(i) the parent's conduct, or
(ii) living in a situation where there is domestic violence by or towards a person with whom the child resides;
(f) if the child is deprived of necessary health care;
(g) if the child's development is likely to be seriously impaired by a treatable condition and the child's parent refuses to provide or consent to treatment;
(h) if the child's parent is unable or unwilling to care for the child and has not made adequate provision for the child's care;
(i) if the child is or has been absent from home in circumstances that endanger the child's safety or well-being;
(j) if the child's parent is dead and adequate provision has not been made for the child's care;
(k) if the child has been abandoned and adequate provision has not been made for the child's care;
(l) if the child is in the care of a director or another person by agreement and the child's parent is unwilling or unable to resume care when the agreement is no longer in force.
(1.1) For the purpose of subsection (1) (b) and © but without limiting the meaning of "sexually abused" or "sexually exploited", a child has been or is likely to be sexually abused or sexually exploited if the child has been, or is likely to be,
(a) encouraged or helped to engage in prostitution, or
(b) coerced or inveigled into engaging in prostitution.
(1.2) For the purpose of subsection (1) (a) and © but without limiting the circumstances that may increase the likelihood of physical harm to a child, the likelihood of physical harm to a child increases when the child is living in a situation where there is domestic violence by or towards a person with whom the child resides.
(2) For the purpose of subsection (1) (e), a child is emotionally harmed if the child demonstrates severe
(a) anxiety,
(b) depression,
© withdrawal, or
(d) self-destructive or aggressive behaviour.
(3) For certainty, a child does not need protection in the circumstances described in subsection (1) (d) or (h) solely on the basis of socioeconomic conditions, including the following:
(a) poverty;
(b) the lack of adequate housing or infrastructure;
© the state of health of a parent of the child.