This is the 12th individual report on this blog in 5 days in connection with the 'Hall Inquest'.

Why the particular interest?

Because it involves First Nations? Or children? Or because vague connections are being made between this case and the broader issue of homelessness in this city?

Because the issue has been before the public for the past seven years, in spite of repeated demands there was no inquest called. The matter was raised in a provincial election, has been dealt with extensively by the National media, and has been reported by the local media equally or more then 250. That seems reason enough to carry what we consider to be an important news story.
If you feel the story is not to your liking, please scroll by it.

It's not a question of 'scrolling by' stories that one doesn't like.

It's a question of challenging the Editor when one particularly emotional and disturbing story is blatantly used to advance an unrelated personal agenda (the blocking of the proposed supported housing development on Queensway Street).


'The new shelter to be built on Queensway is just another example of this mentality. Instead of trying to keep people in the community with their family, we as a society move them into an existence which can only spell disaster.

Who gains? Well it is not the people who are on the streets and in many cases it is their family’s who again come to the rescue to retrieve these people from the gutter.

We have built an empire looking after the homeless instead of trying to find a way and means of having them treated in in their home communities.'

I, for one, am very interested and appreciative of the coverage of this story.

Four score and a hundred and fifty years ago
Our forefathers made us equal as long as we can pay

Yeah, well maybe that wasn't exactly what they was thinkin'

Version six-point-oh of the American (Canadian to?) way

But hey we can just build a great wall around the country club

To keep the riff-raff out until the slump is through

Yeah, I realize that ain't exactly democratic, but it's either them or us and
And it's the best we can do
-Steve Earle "Amerika 6.0 (The best that we can do)

I don't feel the problem exists with the ministry or the foster parents. This is typical finger pointing and name calling from the natural mother who is totally incapable of looking after herself let alone a baby. I would not doubt she is only interested in some kind of payout.

I'm sorry but anytime a child dies needlessly I would say thats its a big issue. Doesn't matter whether the people are first nations or caucacian. Its not about homelessness or housing either. Like Ben said this issue has been waiting for a long time for an inquest and it is definately a story that I have been following. The truth needs to come out no matter who's involved and appropriate actions taken.

I'm sorry that your sorry.

Darn rights the truth needs to come out. The family deserves the truth if nothing else. More than the allowable amount of children at one time is crazy. Kids can get aggressive and out of control (especially if one or more has a condition of any sort), the adult can easily get frazzled and stressed day in and day out and so on. Recipe for disaster obviously. Tragedy. Stories like these need to be told for awareness.

When you go back over so many of the case histories relating to the deaths of children in care,there does seem to be a pattern.
Two things always seem to come up:
#1- The parents (mother,father,or both)are unable or unwilling to care for the child so the kid(s) end up in care/foster home.
#2- The excuse that there was no money,no manpower,people overworked,etc.etc.always seems to be mentioned by government agencies and complaints are not always investigated because of it.
Re:1/ Sorry,but if you don't look after your child,that should be a criminal offence and actually it IS!
You should have to answer for that, or at least be put in a mandatory program that will help you to deal with your issues.The parents SHOULD be held accountable.
Re:2/ If there is not enough money,manpower,too much of a workload,etc.etc.then the agency responsible should also be held accountable for that as well.That is not an excuse for kids dying, and if the fault lies with government funding etc.then they should also answer for that and be forced to fix the problems.
It won't bring any of these kids back,but it might save some others.
I realize it isn't always simple,but there is still no excuse for allowing parents to abuse their children in anyway,and neglect for any reason IS a form of abuse, like anything else!
Consuming alcohol and drugs during pregnancy (resulting in FASD) should in fact be a crime.That IS neglect.
Do it and it will be treated as such.
That may not be an answer either,but it MAY give these government agencies a bit more control over deadbeats who shirk their duties as a parent!
The problems start with parents,not the government,and if parents had to answer for that,it MIGHT just make a difference and take some of the heat of the government agencies!
It isn't always the governments fault, but they do have the power to make things better.
Problems are not fixed by starting in the middle,they are fixed by starting at the begining, where they originated!

Moses et al...this is a story of child abuse and gross neglect. It is not about the birth of socialism or any other idealism you may hold.

This story is finally getting the coverage it should, seven years after the fact.

What is your brilliant deduction from that fact alone ?

Savanna obviously had a number of strikes against her from day one. Her mother appears to be a product of the age old Aboriginal issue of oppression & discrimination. We easily forget that Western European domination has squeezed out their culture and most of us "whities" are all socialized to look at 1st Nations from a negative perspective.

Imagine how successful you'd be if you grew up in poverty with parents who are prenatally effected by substances themselves, who have no clearly defined identity, and who have been programmed to address problems & issues with substance misuse, violence and shame.

Treaties and Gov't payouts are not going to end this unfortunate cultural phenomenon. In fact they will likely stagnate it and possibly further damage the cultural relationship and the overall success of First Nations.

Education, collaboration, and the passage of time might assist with change, but I think that Aboriginal communities, associations, families, houses, clans, etc. will need to decrease dependency, increase education, and not only hold the government but hold themselves accountable to the deeply entrenched problems of addictions, violence, sexual abuse, secrecy, lack of education and difficulty accessing employment.

Savanna likely died of a medical condition that is linked to her mother's unhealthy choices and behaviours. I don't think we can ever know if the foster parent contributed in any way to her death. Her track record as a foster parent seems to suggest otherwise. What will we learn from this inquiry? I suspect very little. I think that this inquiry is an outrageously expensive token that is being extended to a few people to minimize liability and provide a false sense of importance and closure.

12-13 years ago, Matthew Vaudreuil died in BC, which resulted in Judge Gove's inquiry. Sweeping changes were made and the push to reduce the numbers of children in care became urgent. At that time England had been through almost 70 similar inquires. BC has had a few since then. About three of them have been in the North. Inquiries and multiple other factors put the protection system in a constant state of fluctuation and the costs of running this system constantly get greater and greater. Despite all that has been learned from so many inquires there will continue to be lousy parents and the protection system will continue to struggle with the retention of staff.
The small number of social workers who do this work should be commended because they deal with some of the toughest, most painful issues in our society. Ministry Social workers are asked to wear multiple complex hats. They are asked to develop relationships with families, children and cultural communities and agencies. Then they have to conduct investigations that sometimes result in the removal of children, which is met with enormous objections and emotional reaction from the same families who are supported and represented by the same agencies and communities. They also have to deal with the demands of the court process, which holds them to a very high standard resulting in stress and burn out. From what I've read and heard it's a thankless job and almost all of them burn out or simply don't bother continuing when there are less stressful jobs available in the private sector or in other less stressful positions in government.

As mentioned by someone else above, the ministry always says that there were too few social workers with too many cases. If this message is so consistent why isn't there a focus on keeping people in frontline positions much longer? The private sector has the luxury of hiring because of demand and when demand goes up they hire more people. The gov't has the challenge of justifying more spending when demand goes up because the money comes from the tax payer. The public demands that children are kept safe but I'm not sure they're not willing to pay for it. And if they're not willing to pay for it then they have to accept that children will continue to be abused and neglected and tragically they will continue to die preventable deaths.

Very thoughtful post, a good comment indeed.