Marking 20 years
of bold journalism,
reader supported.
Rights + Justice

Gov't Kept Kids in Unsafe Homes Says Watchdog

Children left to live with known abusers; probe planned.

Sean Holman 17 Sep

Sean Holman is editor and publisher of Public Eye Online and is legislative reporter for 24 hours Vancouver newspaper, where a version of this article was published this morning.

image atom
BC Representative for Children and Youth Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond.

The Campbell administration left vulnerable children in homes it judged unsafe, according to British Columbia's independent child protection watchdog, Mary Ellen Turpel-Lafond.

The newspaper 24 Hours Vancouver exclusively learned about the controversy in records obtained via a freedom of information request.

Turpel-Lafond says she's launched an unprecedented audit that will investigative this and related matters. But the Ministry of Children and Family Development says it's already responding to her concerns.

At issue: the government's Child in Home of a Relative program, which will service an estimated 4,767 kids in 2008.

Under that program -- which was transferred from the Ministry of Housing and Social Development to the Ministry of Children and Family Development last month -- parents who can't care for their children can place them in the home of a relative. And that relative will receive financial aide from the government if there's "no evidence of a level of risk to the child."

But Turpel-Lafond, whose job title is B.C. Representative for Children and Youth, advised the government on July 10, 2008 she's identified "serious child and youth safety concerns" related to the screening process introduced seven months before to assess that risk level.

Loaded shotgun, abusive residents

In a three-page letter sent to Lesley du Toit and Cairine MacDonald -- the top bureaucrats at the Ministry of Children and Family Development and the Ministry of Housing and Social Development -- Turpel-Lafond cited four cases where homes have been denied assistance because there was evidence of risk. But the government hadn't taken action to remove the children from those homes.

Among the cases:

As a result, Turpel-Lafond stressed the need for government to develop a policy that "addresses the risk faced by children left in homes that have been judged unsafe for them." And it is "difficult to understand" why social workers attempted to "over-ride the results of a process intended to reduce risks to vulnerable children."

No 'adequate resolution' yet: Turpel-Lafond

The government's three-paragraph response to the representative came six days later. The letter stated "a review and evaluation of our experience to date" with the Child in Home of a Relative program is "planned for the end of August."

The government also promised the four cases Turpel-Lafond identified "will appropriately be reviewed and considered under the Child Family and Community Service Act and the results of those assessments and investigations will be shared with you."

But when asked yesterday about the present status of those cases, Turpel-Lafond told 24 Hours that she didn't have "adequate resolution."

The youth representative also said she hasn't heard anything further from the ministry regarding her concerns about children who have been left in unsafe homes.

But the representative says she has written to regional child welfare directors expressing her concern about funding being given to such homes.

"The social worker on the line was saying, 'Okay, we know there's a failed criminal record check. But we're satisfied it's safe. So let's place a child there under CIHR. So a criminal record check doesn't lead to an ineligibility. It's overridden and the child is placed."

Kids 'found to be safe': ministry

Asked for comment about the representative's concerns, Children and Family Development communications director Kelly Gleeson said in a written statement the four cases referenced by Turpel-Lafond have been investigated. And "in all of these cases the children or youth involved have been found to be safe."

Gleeson also stressed, "If over the course of the screening processes the ministry becomes aware of any protection concerns related to a family, the ministry will assess those child protection concerns, where necessary conduct an investigation and provide supports as necessary."

Gleeson added the ministry's review of those processes will be "conducted this fall" and examine "how staff have responded and the extent to which the screening checks have identified child welfare concerns in the homes of relatives applying for CIHR funding."

Previous concerns

This isn't the first time concerns have been raised about the Child in Home of a Relative program.

In May 2008, the Victoria Times-Colonist's Lindsay Kines reported on the case of a four-year-old aboriginal girl who had been beaten by her grandmother, who was receiving funding from the program.

The grandmother, who "drank too much, suffered from panic attacks and worked the night shift," received three years probation after pleading guilty to assault causing bodily harm.

Then, in April, Turpel-Lafond issued a report stating there was an "inadequate assessment of the relative's ability to care" for the four-year-old, "incomplete child protection investigations" and "no reassessment of risk completed while the family was receiving ongoing protective services."

The representative says her office is now undertaking an audit of the Child in Home of a Relative program -- the first she's launched since taking office. That audit has been under design since June.

Related Tyee stories:


  • Share:

Get The Tyee's Daily Catch, our free daily newsletter.

Tyee Commenting Guidelines

Comments that violate guidelines risk being deleted, and violations may result in a temporary or permanent user ban. Maintain the spirit of good conversation to stay in the discussion.
*Please note The Tyee is not a forum for spreading misinformation about COVID-19, denying its existence or minimizing its risk to public health.


  • Be thoughtful about how your words may affect the communities you are addressing. Language matters
  • Challenge arguments, not commenters
  • Flag trolls and guideline violations
  • Treat all with respect and curiosity, learn from differences of opinion
  • Verify facts, debunk rumours, point out logical fallacies
  • Add context and background
  • Note typos and reporting blind spots
  • Stay on topic

Do not:

  • Use sexist, classist, racist, homophobic or transphobic language
  • Ridicule, misgender, bully, threaten, name call, troll or wish harm on others
  • Personally attack authors or contributors
  • Spread misinformation or perpetuate conspiracies
  • Libel, defame or publish falsehoods
  • Attempt to guess other commenters’ real-life identities
  • Post links without providing context

Most Popular

Most Commented

Most Emailed


The Barometer

Are You Concerned about Your Municipality’s Water Security?

Take this week's poll