Baby Mona Clare Should Have Had Her Own Lawyer

Tuesday, June 28, 2005
The Halifax Herald Limited
Infant needed her own lawyer, group says
By BILL POWER / Staff Reporter
Before an armed standoff with police late last spring, Larry Finck went to court to try to keep his daughter.
A group pushing for a public inquiry into the events surrounding the seizure of the newborn by child-welfare workers said Monday the baby should have had her own lawyer.
"No one is independently representing the interests and fundamental rights of (the child)," said Dulcie Conrad, a member of the group.
She said the lack of legal representation is a violation of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.
The group, composed of neighbours and academics, held a news conference Monday to reinforce their insistence that Justice Minister Michael Baker order a public inquiry into the forcible removal of the baby girl from the care of her mother, Carline VandenElsen, and Mr. Finck.
Members of the group said the public has a right to know what prompted the Children's Aid Society of Halifax to seek the court order that led to police descending on the family home in the wee hours of May 19, 2004. The standoff ensued and lasted until the evening of May 21.
Court documents indicate Nova Scotia authorities were responding to an alert from child welfare officials in Ontario.
"We still don't know why authorities really decided to seize this baby or why they used such massive force to do it," Ms. Conrad said.
The justice minister, in Greenwich for the Tory caucus meeting, repeated Monday he believes there is nothing to warrant an inquiry.
"I'm not aware of any new information . . . that would require an inquiry," Mr. Baker said.
He said the matter has gone before two different judges at two different levels of the court system.
"I don't know if (the issue) is more complicated than (that) people don't like the decision," he said. "That doesn't necessitate an inquiry."
Mr. Baker wouldn't talk about why the child did not have independent representation.
He said proper procedures were followed, "and that's to consider the best interests of the child, not of the parents."
Documents show Justice Deborah Smith of Nova Scotia Supreme Court' s family division had concerns about Ms. VandenElsen's mental health after she went into hiding with the child rather than comply with a court order to undergo a psychiatric evaluation.
But some say evidence that the child was at risk was not presented. Lawyer Ray Kuszelewski said questions remain unanswered about the original court order to seize the newborn.
"It really is important to know how this entire matter got to the point that it did," said Mr. Kuszelewski, who provided some representation for the couple during their high-profile trial on charges related to the standoff.
He said an inquiry would review evidence presented to the family court by Children's Aid staff and also consider larger issues relating to child seizures when concerns exist about the mental stability of parents.
Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck were convicted of several offences in the standoff, and the 18-month-old child is in the care of children's aid.

Is she really? How do we know? How do we know that she is even alive?

Perhaps a request under the Information Act might provide an answer? Then again....