Whenever the Kathleen Wynne government mentions these words my parental rights radar goes into overdrive.
With Ontario’s Bill 89 -Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, Kathleen Wynne is attempting to erode parental authority over their children once more.
The bill seeks to amend and repeal the Child and Family Services Act and make amendments to other acts. These acts relate to matters dealing with child protection (Children's Aid Society etc.), foster, and adoption services.
I've read the Bill, and the related Acts, and I've conferred with other concerned and like-minded parties. Here's why we all should be concerned about Bill 89:
· The government is expanding its definition of what is "a child in need". Beware. A child agency will intervene if they determine "a child is in need of protection". Under Bill 89, one way a child is in need of protection is if "there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer emotional harm...and that the child’s parent or the person having charge of the child does not provide services or treatment or access to services or treatment...".
Hypothetically, if my daughter doesn't clean up her bedroom, is there a risk she may feel anxious if I confront her and make her do it? Must I provide her therapy for the anxiety she may experience? Or if a young child now declares he is a dog and wants to be treated as such, yet the parents refuse- would this child be considered a child in need? What if the child says he is transgendered instead, and mommy and daddy (oops- it's "parent" and "birth parent" now!) refuse to take this child for hormone therapy and surgery to change his private parts? It looks like this child would be considered a "child in need" now.
· The government is pushing gender ideology onto child services. This means child protection, foster, adoption service providers, and judges will now have to take into consideration a child's “race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity and gender expression.” And it won't matter if your child is 5 or 15.
·The religious faith in a child's upbringing is no longer a consideration. What this means is that if for any reason Child Services intervenes in a family and places a child into foster care, the “religious faith, if any, in which the child is being raised” as the Act previously mentioned, will no longer matter. In fact with this Bill, "religious faith" is stricken out at nearly every reference contained within the previous Act.
· A parent's role is diminished. The current law states that "the parent of a child in care retains any right ... to direct the child’s education and religious upbringing...". With Bill 89 parents have a right “to direct the child or young person’s education and upbringing, in accordance with the child’s or young person’s creed, community identity and cultural identity.” No longer do parents direct their child's religious upbringing, but parents (and Children's Aid Services et al.) bring up the child in accordance with the child's creed. The emphasis is on the child to develop their “creed”, not the parents.
· Not ALL foster parents and adoptive parents will be treated equally. Several of you have shared with me your stories of fostering and/or adopting children; this is especially important for you. With Bill 89, if, for example, you reject gender ideology, you might be discriminated against. I have already heard reports of such discrimination. Bill 89 might put this practice into law.
What can we do? Let's start a groundswell! Sign the petition to STOP BILL 89! Click this link http://pafe.nationbuilder.com/stop_bill_89 to sign, and please forward via email, Facebook and twitter.
Tanya Granic Allen, President
Parents As First Educators