CIPanel.Submissions@gov.ab.ca
Re: Ministerial Panel on Child Intervention Meeting April 20, 2017:
Generally, I prefer to offer positive feedback despite personal negative experience in effort to be impartial and constructive. However, the impression I and other onlookers took away from the Panel Meeting, I must honestly report, was dismal.
If I were able to sum up a single statement to offer to Panelists - which was not even an option for Public consultation at the table - is the fact that a humongous elephant in the room continues to be evaded:
While I appreciate we're stressing caution towards blame, unfortunately, that blanket aspect hinders true protection of children. Accountability is a must; healing cannot occur without Justice and means to amend wrongdoing.
Each week the System sees the death of an additional child. Yet, we forego response to avert crisis because we don't want hurt feelings. Frankly, it's BS and anyone who honestly wants to improve conditions will need to put aside pride and accept responsibility to move forward.
Questions Panelists inquired about, for instance, centred on gaining Public trust. The solution fundamentally rests with the problem asked in and of itself amongst the Panel instead of directly to affected Persons. As with Reconciliation initiatives, words and incentives from Academics are meaningless without imbedded community action.
Families continue to be damaged by the System; therefore, gaining trust cannot reasonably be expected.
There are wonderful workers with good hearts. It's obvious amongst selected Panelists who grew teary-eyed at revelations. However, there is a vast number of workers who do not function with respect, caution or diligence. Like it or not, this is a harsh reality which must be recognized. Individual interpretation by unqualified, prejudiced Authorities creates unequal ground that is not a positive conduit for healing.
Examples would likely astound some Members of the Panel. As one confessed, they were largely unaware of themes impeding First Nations' persons bearing generational trauma and suspect ignorance resonates amongst others.
The Panel itself consisted mainly of visibly white Members aside from an Elder who offered prayer and his hand in introduction to onlookers.
Imagine being judged by Authorities whose image of culture is wrought with stigma? A relative of one child who died had, for instance, applied for guardianship, submitted to Child Welfare and Criminal Record background investigation. The results were clear; however, the social-worker callously expressed surprise at a positive determination. Plain and simple: Prejudgment and prejudice due to the colour of skin exists. This is also true of other factors such as age, disability, and economics in the treatment of benign conditions.
Trust cannot be built in the absence of Community inclusion in matters. Apology without change is futile. Acknowledgment of lack of awareness is a step forward, however, it's disheartening to witness Panelists exclude the very individuals they hope to bolster to success.
Respect is missing. If this were not so, the Panel would include the Public at ground level. In the Audience, there was a social-worker who happens to also be a Residential School survivor. Why is this individual not at the table utilizing first-hand wisdom to educate Panelists who self-proclaim disjointed understanding of conditions? There are Members of the Public who have risen to become eloquent speakers and professionals in the humanities. Persons who continue to interact daily with families in situations of trauma and can bridge Family-Centred Care between Administration and Public.
Problematic themes include the following:
Members of the Public were situated behind presenters, thus unable to view expressive language.
Break for dining was offered Panelists while Members of the Public were excluded. Some interested individuals had traveled to Edmonton from as far as Calgary. Members of the Public do not have the benefit of financial incentives, only desire to stop our youth from being harmed. Given limited audience, it would have been respectful to offer a token meal to guests as well.
Formal identification needed to be surrendered to Sheriffs prior to admittance. For those lacking Government ID, Public input was therefore not truly an option.
"Should" and "ought" were words heard frequently during discussion, yet phrases which do not occur outside of Panels.
Interaction needs to occur. Instead the Panel watched video content. We can participate in educational data at any time but coming together is a unique opportunity to hold meaningful discussion.
Research on management of toxic stress provided some understanding of generational trauma, but stopped short of addressing the same conditions of harm that is imposed by the System itself on families through imposed alienation.
Enough with being prim and proper. The truth isn't nice nor upbeat; we have to speak about little dead children.
Which, leads me to address the conclusion of the Panel meeting: Utilizing the musical piece - "Here Comes the Sun" -was traumatizing and offensive for many of us. While obviously a well-intentioned manoeuvre to look towards hope, darkness remains harsh reality. That truth is evident in Panelists' lack of insight to the unique conditions which continue to plague Child Welfare recipients and the emotions involved; particularly amongst those who survive trauma.
I'm sorry to burst the bubble, but the real insight offered by the Panel seems to be just how disengaged Members are with the realities families are living within. Someone needs to say it, to tell the truth and be critical despite hard feelings. Otherwise, 10 years from now, another group will be sitting in Panel lamenting deaths of our young.
Sincerely,
Velvet Martin,
Spokesperson for Protecting Canadian Children
Founder of Samantha's Law
Alberta Youth Voice Radio #opexposecps
#Albertayouthvoiceradio for some reason this post is not showing , so I willl copy and pasted Velvet Martin's amazing post:
CIPanel.Submissions@gov.ab.ca
Re: Ministerial Panel on Child Intervention Meeting April 20, 2017:
Generally, I prefer to offer positive feedback despite personal negative experience in effort to be impartial and constructive. However, the impression I and other onlookers took away from the Panel Meeting, I must honestly report, was dismal.
If I were able to sum up a single statement to offer to Panelists - which was not even an option for Public consultation at the table - is the fact that a humongous elephant in the room continues to be evaded:
While I appreciate we're stressing caution towards blame, unfortunately, that blanket aspect hinders true protection of children. Accountability is a must; healing cannot occur without Justice and means to amend wrongdoing.
Each week the System sees the death of an additional child. Yet, we forego response to avert crisis because we don't want hurt feelings. Frankly, it's BS and anyone who honestly wants to improve conditions will need to put aside pride and accept responsibility to move forward.
Questions Panelists inquired about, for instance, centred on gaining Public trust. The solution fundamentally rests with the problem asked in and of itself amongst the Panel instead of directly to affected Persons. As with Reconciliation initiatives, words and incentives from Academics are meaningless without imbedded community action.
Families continue to be damaged by the System; therefore, gaining trust cannot reasonably be expected.
There are wonderful workers with good hearts. It's obvious amongst selected Panelists who grew teary-eyed at revelations. However, there is a vast number of workers who do not function with respect, caution or diligence. Like it or not, this is a harsh reality which must be recognized. Individual interpretation by unqualified, prejudiced Authorities creates unequal ground that is not a positive conduit for healing.
Examples would likely astound some Members of the Panel. As one confessed, they were largely unaware of themes impeding First Nations' persons bearing generational trauma and suspect ignorance resonates amongst others.
The Panel itself consisted mainly of visibly white Members aside from an Elder who offered prayer and his hand in introduction to onlookers.
Imagine being judged by Authorities whose image of culture is wrought with stigma? A relative of one child who died had, for instance, applied for guardianship, submitted to Child Welfare and Criminal Record background investigation. The results were clear; however, the social-worker callously expressed surprise at a positive determination. Plain and simple: Prejudgment and prejudice due to the colour of skin exists. This is also true of other factors such as age, disability, and economics in the treatment of benign conditions.
Trust cannot be built in the absence of Community inclusion in matters. Apology without change is futile. Acknowledgment of lack of awareness is a step forward, however, it's disheartening to witness Panelists exclude the very individuals they hope to bolster to success.
Respect is missing. If this were not so, the Panel would include the Public at ground level. In the Audience, there was a social-worker who happens to also be a Residential School survivor. Why is this individual not at the table utilizing first-hand wisdom to educate Panelists who self-proclaim disjointed understanding of conditions? There are Members of the Public who have risen to become eloquent speakers and professionals in the humanities. Persons who continue to interact daily with families in situations of trauma and can bridge Family-Centred Care between Administration and Public.
Problematic themes include the following:
Members of the Public were situated behind presenters, thus unable to view expressive language.
Break for dining was offered Panelists while Members of the Public were excluded. Some interested individuals had traveled to Edmonton from as far as Calgary. Members of the Public do not have the benefit of financial incentives, only desire to stop our youth from being harmed. Given limited audience, it would have been respectful to offer a token meal to guests as well.
Formal identification needed to be surrendered to Sheriffs prior to admittance. For those lacking Government ID, Public input was therefore not truly an option.
"Should" and "ought" were words heard frequently during discussion, yet phrases which do not occur outside of Panels.
Interaction needs to occur. Instead the Panel watched video content. We can participate in educational data at any time but coming together is a unique opportunity to hold meaningful discussion.
Research on management of toxic stress provided some understanding of generational trauma, but stopped short of addressing the same conditions of harm that is imposed by the System itself on families through imposed alienation.
Enough with being prim and proper. The truth isn't nice nor upbeat; we have to speak about little dead children.
Which, leads me to address the conclusion of the Panel meeting: Utilizing the musical piece - "Here Comes the Sun" -was traumatizing and offensive for many of us. While obviously a well-intentioned manoeuvre to look towards hope, darkness remains harsh reality. That truth is evident in Panelists' lack of insight to the unique conditions which continue to plague Child Welfare recipients and the emotions involved; particularly amongst those who survive trauma.
I'm sorry to burst the bubble, but the real insight offered by the Panel seems to be just how disengaged Members are with the realities families are living within. Someone needs to say it, to tell the truth and be critical despite hard feelings. Otherwise, 10 years from now, another group will be sitting in Panel lamenting deaths of our young.
Sincerely,
Velvet Martin,
Spokesperson for Protecting Canadian Children
Founder of Samantha's Law
from FB-RSS feed for Op Expose DCS Arizona #opexposecps https://www.facebook.com/opexposeCPSAlberta/posts/1157806530994830
No comments:
Post a Comment