If she has no appropriate family to take care of the child then I agree adoption is the next best option. A child should not be raised in a prision under any circumstances. I think its totally unacceptable.

Anybody who is a good parent, which i'm betting you are, is educated enough to make this sort of judgement call. At this point in the game we only care about the child. The mother blew her rights away. Even if the child was taken care of the best way this mother knew how she can't provide the child with the best enviroment. Once the child turns 4 they will just rip it out of its mothers arms to be given to strangers? This isn't a puppy we're talking about who grew up in the SPCA. My daughter is 4 and it would crush her little soul if she didn't have me.

Poor kid.

What I do find truly incredible, is that there are people(Ginger Bacchus?)working within the system who actually believe that putting kids in jail with their mothers is a good thing?
Sorry,but that is just plain sick!
(Heidi555 is correct when she says this is NOT a puppy!)
IMO,nothing justifies putting a kid into the prison system with their mother or anyone else, and all this does is tell us that the system is not only sick,it is completely out of control.
Maybe it's time we started looking at just who is making up the rules?
The issues that are very likely to arise for a kid from this kind of stupidity would most likely manifest themselves later on in life,perhaps even as early as their teenage years,and I am suprised and shocked that this practice is considered to be acceptable in anyway.
(can we imagine the fun peer pressure would have with THIS one?)
And while we are dealing with that,could somebody please explain how and why native people can benefit from different treatment in the court and prison system than the rest of the population??
The track record on this should tell us that it is NOT working and the same issues that keep arising for native people over and over are not being dealt with!
Crime is crime,and if you do it,you pay the price,and making exceptions and handing out special penalties and treatment for first nations, or any other ethnic group, sends another misread message.
We cannot keep treating first nations people as "different"because they are not.
They ARE the same as anyone else,and how the hell did we get to this stage?
One of the reasons that first nations people are slow to move forward is because they are considered to be different than the rest of us in the eyes of the law.
When we start treating EVERYONE the SAME with regards to the law and everyday life in general,we will start to restore some order and responsibilty.
Crime has increased because there is no respect for the law or the penalties, and only by tough justice will we ever fix that.
So whats next?
Taking your wife to jail with you so you won't get lonely?

I think as parents we would want the 'best for our child'. I have to wonder like Ben, the outcome of other children that have been through the program.

If this woman is making a legitament attempt to change her life style and her duaghter has helped her realize this, there may be hope for this woman. However if this woman is using this child to make prison an 'easy stay', than the only one suffering -is the child.

I have to wonder the impact 'prison life will stamp into the mind of this child. Children need to socialize with other kids, how will this be done?..they need the interaction of friends..how will this be done?..birthday party's..easter..just an outing to the mall. Early child development is crucial. It would be nice to see how this program works.

In reality the child seems to be paying the price for the mothers actions and I really..think for the childs best interest..she should be aloud to live a normal free life..with or without her mothers involvment.

I also understand she has other children, what is her involvment with them?

Ben, if you read this spell check would be a nice tool on here!..I am a lousy speller!

Ben, if you read this spell check would be a nice tool on here!..I am a lousy speller!

This mom has made a choice, and her choice was to forfeit many of her rights as a ward of the state. Should she really maintain her 'rights' as a parent? Just think if a convicted murderer father wanted to raise his child in prison. I think that that would set off alarm bells!

"kitkat" has a very good point.
If a mother can take her child to prison with her,then why not the father?
Is that next??
I am suprised that this practice hasn't opened up a major can of worms in terms of parental rights between a mother and a father!
I also notice that this practice has not had much exposure...can't imagine why!

I have to question why anyone would be allowed to raise children while in prison. What message does this send?..when men commit a crime they loose thier families..why should it be different for woman?..prison is the penalty for the crime..being allowed to have your children with you while attending..defeats the purpose of punishment, dont you think?.

Well this seems to all be done with selfish intent. The best interest of the child is not being considered. Sorry but whoever is allowing this to happen really needs their head examined and maybe a change in career. Maybe the SPCA is looking for people to take care of the animals.

The people (experts?) who made the decisions here for sure can prove that they have more degrees than a thermometer!

Yet, it goes to show once more: studying a lot of books can cram one full of knowledge, but knowledge is not the same thing as WISDOM!

To put a child in jail with its mother is an unwise decision. Period.

The child can visit the mother regularly and that should be sufficient to establish a bond.

That about says it all diplomat!

Agreed, Ben.

This is another ruling that is based on sentiment, as opposed to reality.

The mother was born and raised in a social compost heap and now the child is in the most negative environment. Corrections staff will babysit the mother babysit her child. The mother is beyond reform and the best indicator of future behavior is past behavior. The mother is no role model to begin with, so how is prison going to benefit the child.

This decision is for the benefit of the mother, not the child. Surely the Ministry can take the child into foster care and, really, should be taking a stand here.

Judges are well educated, but many of them have no common sense.

Another issue I didn't mention was the Aboriginal matter.

Aboriginals are treated differently because of politics and race has played a role in this decision. They want their own self government, justice, etc.

Are Equality Rights not guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Equality rights in this country mean absolutely nothing.

The seeds of apartheid began growing in Canada a long time ago and militant aboriginal groups hold this spineless country to ransom.

Every one is equal. Some more than others.

If she gets thrown into solitary confinement, what happens to the kid?

The correctional facility that accepts women prisoners and their children is not a real jail, apparently.

It is a facility that has a completely different *ambience* - it is not a place to punish for crimes committed and one certainly would not find such a thing as *solitary confinement.*

"Are Equality Rights not guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms? Equality rights in this country mean absolutely nothing."

Not quite. They mean a lot to most.

Native nations have refused to adopt the Canadian Charter of Human Rights when it was enacted about 30 years ago.

The basic rights under this Charter that are enjoyed by every Canadian such as property rights, women's rights etc are therefore not applicable to people of aboriginal ancestry, by the choice of their leader(s).

The Harper government recently re-opened this issue with the intent of reaching a final conclusion but was told by the Grand Chief of Nations that much more study time will be needed than 30 years to decide whether the Canadian Charter of Human Rights would ever be found acceptable by them.

Punish ... punish ... punish .....

correct .... correct .... correct ....

which approach is the correct one?????

are there different approaches for different cases .. or do we use cookie cutters and continue to do the same this year as we did 100 years ago as we will 100 years from now?????

Are we all automatons????? or are we humans who have a brain?? ... or do we always rely on instincts we are born with and be forever like animals who cannot learn from the experience of those who came before them and have no ability to think in the abstract ????

Sometimes I wonder ....

Here is part of the storey as carried in the newspapers .....

"So at age 33, when Lisa Whitford found herself pregnant in jail, awaiting a murder trial, she scared herself straight -- weaning herself off illegal and prescription drugs to stay clean. She delivered a healthy baby girl last March and has successfully raised the infant in a provincial remand centre. And now -- with the help of a University of B.C. law professor and two caring lawyers -- she will become the first woman in B.C. to keep her baby in a federal prison. Whitford, who will serve a four-year sentence for manslaughter at Fraser Valley Institution, will be the first inmate accepted into a little-used federal program that will allow her to raise 11-month-old Jordyn in a condominium on prison grounds. "

Can someone here weigh in now with a bit more of a rational thought pattern based on that information in conjunction with the term "Corrections Canada", rather than the movie version of "prison".

BTW ... as you weigh in with your thoughts, keep in mind the mission statement of the Correctional Services of Canada:

"The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC), as part of the criminal justice system and respecting the rule of law, contributes to public safety by actively encouraging and assisting offenders to become law-abiding citizens, while exercising reasonable, safe, secure and humane control."

http://www.flandersdc.be/view/nl/2078310-Rethinking+Rules+in+Calgary.html

Some may even be able to relate the approach to enforcement of bicyle bell bylaws taken in Calgary to the notion of a mother raising her child in a federal "prison".

;-)

Free bells for bicycles: Now the biker can at least ring his/her bell furiously as he/she speeds through red lights at intersections and ignores all the stop signs!

;-)

You got it!!! ... LOL ...

That is the one thing which struck me about the article ... why even bother with the bylaw in the first place?

I suppose they might have some stats on how many pedestrians were run down and broke their legs because the bikes came up behind them on the sidewalk without the pedestrian realizing it.

;-)

Aboriginals want us to continue to line their pockets, but they don't want to live under the same laws as all Canadians.

They've been receiving handouts from so many sources for so long that, in the end, they're not even grateful for it because they have come to accept it as of right.

Canada has its own version of apartheid!

"Aboriginals want us to continue to line their pockets, but they don't want to live under the same laws as all Canadians."

Got news for you. Not all Canadians live under the same laws.

They live under the same criminal code ... but not under the same employment standards, for instance, and not under the same local bylaws ....

So ..... where do you get the notion from that aborignals want us to continue to line their pockets? I could swear that it is the other way around. We took the furs from their anmimals and sent them to the rest of the world and gave them what???? Our diseases? Pretty coloured beads???

Then we took their trees and did what? Cut them up into pieces and shipped them off to the south and paid them what? I know... I know ... we gave them an education in residential schools ...

ah ... such a deal, eh? Wish I was a First Nations person. I would have it made in the shade .... Mexico, South Sea Islands, here I come with all my cash ....

;-)

As for the "the mission statement of the Correctional Services of Canada" that is a steaming pile of you know what.

An offender's behavior inside prison walls is not indicative of how they will behave on the outside. This woman has already demonstrated her inability to function in an uncontrolled environment and behavior reflects personality. All of her decisions on the inside are made for her yet, the minute she is freed into society's uncontrolled environment, she cannot handle the stresses and strains of everyday life.

People who are given the power to make decisions on behalf of people like this woman actually think they are clever individuals. Well educated though they are, they have no common sense because they sit so high up in their ivory towers.

Owl

"Got news for you. Not all Canadians live under the same laws" That is precisely my point.

"We took the furs from their anmimals....." Spare me. Who's we?

the hamster is still running

Sean .....

let me say that more precisely then......

You said: "Aboriginals want us to continue to line their pockets, but they don't want to live under the same laws as all Canadians."

Your words "all Canadians" obviously refers to all non "First Nations" Canadians.

I merely identified that all people in Canada, no matter what race or ancestral origin, live under a different set of laws from each other.

I live under a different set of laws in PG than my parents live under in Ontario. Some individual laws are the same, others are different.

Remember that the Charter of Rights and Freedoms contains a "notwithstanding clause" in section 33 which gives provincial legislatures the right to override sections 2 and 7 to 15 of the Charter.

The First Nations are still undergoing constitutional negotatiations. Why should they not have the same rights as provinces when it comes to "opting in" or "opting out" of certain rights?

Why should they have lesser rights than the French who were also "conquered" by the Brits yet have retained rights to be "maîtres chez nous".

DUH...... okay .. I'll bite just this once .... :-)

"we" are those who were initially of European and then African and Asian origin who came to North and South America to find lands they had been unaware of and extract some of the resources from that land to ship to the rest of the world.

Sort of like your neighbour taking a few cattle from your range and shipping them for slaughter without paying compensation .....

;-)

oh .... geezzzz .... I thought they were there for the taking ..... they were just roaming around eating all that grass ...

yours?????? ... you're kiddin' .... oops ...

;-)

I didn't take their land. I got mine from Re Max.

Owl

Subsection 15(1) of the Charter, in effect since April 1985, provides that:

Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

In Canada, this isn't practised now, tomorrow or ever. Aboriginals have their own fishing regulations and judges admit it is discriminatory, even racist. They even receive free prescription drugs and, if I'm not mistaken, free post secondary education. They receive handouts from so many sources that they have come to expect it. In fact, they abuse it. Every year, at the University of BC, one seat is set aside for an aboriginal, even if other races have better qualifications.

Even federal government agencies such as the RCMP and Customs recruit in the following manner. White males must score the highest on entry exams, females next, followed by minorities and aboriginals don't really have a passing mark. All of this is inconsistent with Equality Rights.

If you were seeking employment and worked very hard for years to achieve your goal, but were told that an aboriginal with mediocre qualifications was hired because of affirmative action instead, how would you feel? You see, Owl, different laws for different races divides people more than it unites them.

In conclusion, Equality Rights via the Charter mean absolutely nothing in a country where mediocrity is the measuring stick.