Skip | Print | e-mail

Graemea & CYF New Zealand

Graeme Axford documents his Employment dispute with Child Youth & Family, (CYF) New Zealand

Home | CYF Employment | Statement | Disclaimer | Links | Blogs | Video's | Photos

Table of Content  Page 28 of 28

Ray Smith Interview Close Up

CYF spokesperson Ray Smith answers should serve as a good example of the regurgitation of nonsensical peripheral waffle for those watching the interview on close up program on TV1 March 13th. It also shows why you can not trust CYF to be upfront, honest and take responsibility let alone apologize if they ever see they made a mistake to spite the fact everyone can see it.

There are two aspects of that story to which I will now explain for those who missed it followed by examples of what I mean.

The first was about Billy and Michelle Carter had their second child Joshua taken away by CYFs when he was just one month old. Their first child had died and baby Joshua had similar health issues, putting his parents under suspicion. A doctor had made a report to police and to CYF suggesting Michelle was to blame a second report cleared them.

The parents understood the reasoning but when they were cleared by another doctor CYF still held onto Joshua. Not content with that CYF then changed tack and tried to claim the mother Michelle was mentally unstable to which she was cleared by a psychologist assessment.

The point Mr Smith, is that if your child was uplifted for reasons for which Michelle was cleared, you would want your child back ASAP.

While your delays and excuses and other things never seem to come to an end, you deny Michelle the prompt return or reasonable access to her child, in the meantime you cast her as mentally unstable for all the anxiety you caused her.

I think that could be considered as a self fulfilling prophecy and shows how void of feelings you really are and I think that is unethical and heartless but not untypical of the department.

Finally, after 10 months, a judge said Joshua was to return home. The second part of the story focused on a man called Jonny Ward who resigned in protest from CYFs because of what he considered "unethical practices" among other things.

MR Smith while you seemed to suggest MR ward was on his own with the concerns not grasping our system or not giving himself enough time to adjust, need I remind you of the story from Simon Collins Saturday February 03, 2007 in the NZ HEARILD which stated

Two British social workers have accused New Zealand's child protection agency of "gross professional incompetence", including unnecessarily ripping children from their mother's arms without any idea of where to place them.

O what a short memory you have Mr Smith to forget that, so now we have two people saying the same thing and not just one as you claimed on TV, and there is more to come.

While I could pull apart a lot of what you said, I see it as pointless as you do not listen and keep making excuses. I have however attached the links for you to follow, supporting some of my claims. Unlike you Mr. Smith I think people deserve more then opinion and mere waffle and try to give evidence and substance to what I am saying..

Mr Smith seemed to make a vague reference to CYF having around 3000 staff, as some kind of justification, and to water down the fact that MR ward had resigned. I can recall articles saying CYF losing up to 8 staff a week and the figure has been quoted as high as a 20% staff turnover. So how do the numbers match up to whatever you were trying to say, to deflect the hard questions so it seems.

Now to add in a third factor from National Party Associate Welfare (CYF) Spokeswoman Anne Tolley MP. There was a press release put out on Wednesday, 14 March 2007, 11:10 am asking "Why did Dyson refuse to meet social worker?" Like CYF I am only going to give you half the story. (Just joking) you will have to follow the links below to read the answers, unlike CYF I try to support my claims.

Mrs Tolley says CYF now appears to be saying that Mr Ward, an experienced social worker, does not know what he is talking about. Given, I believe, that Mr Ward has 19 years experience and a Social Work degree, one would think the CYC minister, Ruth Dyson, would meet with MR Ward if he offered. Like CYF let's twist things a little out of context and put a slant on them to make a point:
If Ruth Dyson hears no evil about CYF, then she can say she sees no evil, and of course does not have to speak of the evil, if asked by media or other MPs about CYF. It also means that if you don't hear, see or speak about the evil, then you also don't need to do anything about it either. Denial only works for so long and hopefully after the next election it will be gone. No one can accuse this minister of being Ruthless LOL.

Attacking people's credibility or qualifications, experiences and minimizing parents concerns is nothing unusual for CYF. They don't listen and seem to have difficulties admitting they are wrong, if at all, which is why CyfWatch appeared. The minister Ruth Dyson seems unwilling to help, so, no surprises, something went wrong with Mr Ward's meeting. It did not happen.

People who know how to use google or alike can search the internet and look up the governments own reports on CYF, the stories article and media webpages release are clearly at odds with Ray Smith's views, from what I read to date.

MR Smith like many of the CYF spin doctors may think he can sell ice to Eskimos and hope to convince them it's a good deal, but we aren't that stupid.

Maybe Mr Smith has heard the new quote and believes it:

You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on. American 43rd US President since 2001. b.1946

With the raging debate over Sue Branford's anti smacking bill, with people mostly focusing on how and under what circumstances the police will respond, and what it will mean for parents, people seem to have forgotten about CYF. Let us not forget that, the police unlike CYF, seems more accountable, and as MR Ward stated, CYF seems to be a law unto itself and have to much power already.

I do realize CYF will have an answer for this but can you trust them on that, given their current track record and ongoing issues. While Sue Branford said the bill and debate should be centered around the welfare of the children. I have one question for you. Can you not see that having children uplifted by CYF because of suspected child abuse e.g. smacking, can equally damage children's wellbeing.

It seems a parent only needs to be accused by CYF after having received an anonymous complaint for the parents to risk to lose their child, while CYF is taking forever to investigate. Let us not forget that CYF is working under the balance of probability, which is a different level of proof then that required of the police. I can see Sue Bradford's bill fraught with hidden dangers, I just hope I am wrong about whatI can see happening.

Graeme Axford
"Address Withheld" Kaiata

New Zealand Herald

Tv Nz and more Tv Nz

Michael Basset

Table of Content  Page 28 of 28


Media Coverage :Back   ^ UP ^   Content

copyright © Graeme Axford  |  site hosting by