CYFS considers itself above justice
This story reported that CYFS interrogated Chris Kahui’s partner while she was giving birth to their next child. According to Mr Kahui, CYFS banned him from any contact with his new daughter except in the presence of a CYFS-approved supervisor, and they threatened to remove the baby from her mother if he disobeyed their command.
Regardless of what we might think of this man or other family members, CYFS actions here are sexist and highlight their denigrating attitudes to fathers and favouritism towards women. When Chris Kahui was prosecuted for the killing the Kahui twins, the jury took “only minutes” to acquit him. The evidence did not rule out the possibility that the mother killed the twins, and regardless it raised serious concerns about the mother’s lifestyle and ability to protect and otherwise to care for her children. The jury heard all the evidence in a long and thorough trial, but CYFS now decides it is better placed to judge the case. CYFS leaves the new baby unsupervised with the mother and treats the father as the primary risk. Under NZ’s laws based on feminist ideology, CYFS has no need to respect civil rights, to treat someone as innocent unless found guilty, or to respect any right this baby has to develop normal, unencumbered bonds with her father that can secure his commitment to a long term role in her future. Instead, CYFS is allowed to operate a policy that sees the mother as being much more important than the father, and that overlooks the same risks and shortcomings in mothers that will readily be used to justify trashing children’s relationships with their fathers.
Very sad situation.
I think women want to make a life when they lose a life of a child. I think it is natural. But I don’t think the father should be treated this way although it may have been a commitment within the family.
Maybe CYFS had to be seen to at least do something. Why is HE not complaining?
He has a case, I would think.
Chris always struck me as a person who has been bullied all his life and has learnt the safest way is to obey, stay off the radar, never make a decision. By doing nothing, you of course, can never be wrong, and never have to fight.
A case of a public office in New zealand being above truth and justice? surely not, not! If anybody can name a single public body within New Zealand that actually even understands the concept I would be glad to hear of it.
Hmmm there seems to be someone using my name, so I will now be known as Scott B!
The more the merrier, lol
There are 2 single sports in New Zealand: rugby and apologies.
If anything happens the guys would just pull the magic formula: We, obviously apologies to Chris
, we acted on the best information we had at the time to protect the child as well as Chris and all New Zealander will find the official sound with ‘common sense’ and go about their business as usual.
Remember: There 2 sports: Rugby and apologies.
It appears that CYFs had a range of options available to them and chose the most “in your face” approach.
It looks as if they they were acting to maximise their own power and abuse of power. This doesn’t seem to be working to create relationships of trust and respect, based on integrity.
NZ may have poor violence and injury statistics, but it has far worse child injury and death in CYFs care statistics. These statistics show the public, that the management of CYFs are not up to the job and never have been. Ideology is no substitute for being able to do the job!
Labour may have poured in lots of money, but without competent caring management, it may as well be poured straight down the drain, or spent on developing nuclear weapons and missiles!
When the social worker claimed that there was no medical reason that they shouldn’t have spoken to the mother, while she was in Labour pains, this was diverting attention from the real issue – there was no appropriate reason for them to even ask to speak with the mother at that point in time.
Even CYFs know that the time of birth is predictable a long time prior, instead of using this information, they are abusing it. No wonder that so many children are hurt, injured and killed, while in their care.
I am intensely embarrassed that I married one of them. I consider that my children and I have now been punished for my mistake, quite sufficiently. MurrayBacon.
All the officials do is cover their butt. Everything else is literature.
If an accident, disaster happen they pull the magic formula: We apologies to the parties, we acted based on the information we had at the time to safeguard the best interest of the child as well as the parents. They do this because they can. Until then they will go on doing this ad finitum.