Premier Kathleen Wynne of Ontario mounted her high horse again to further impose her ideological views on innocent children by way of recently introduced Bill 89, Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2016.

Bill 89 affirms Ms. Wynne’s belief that children belong to the State, not to their parents. During her term of office, she has done everything in her power to separate the children from their natural family.

Premier Wynne previously forced children to submit to her personal sexual values by forcing a shocking sex-education curriculum on all the children in this province. She is now extending her reach by taking control of the unfortunate children brought under the supervision of Children’s Aid Societies (CAS). In doing so she is targeting the traditional family and its values.

Bill 89 was introduced in the Ontario legislature just before Christmas break. It is entitled Supporting Children, Youth and Families Act, 2016 and replaces the Child and Family Services Act dealing with child protection, foster care and adoption.

There are deep concerns about this bill.

It appears to effectively give wide jurisdiction to the State to control the lives of children in the CAS, and in doing so, interfere with the parent/child relationship. This occurs by defining the “best interests of the child” so broadly as to include: the child’s physical, emotional, mental and developmental needs, as well as the child’s race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, family diversity, disability, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression.

That is, these broad sweeping provisions in the legislation make every family vulnerable to the removal of their children from their home on the basis of the ambiguous provisions listed in the bill as defined by the government, especially by regulations, which require no public debate or approval by the legislature.

For example, this proposed legislation permits the CAS to withdraw a child from its family if it is determined the child is likely to suffer emotional or mental harm, or for a parent’s failure to provide the child with services or treatment. If a child decides he/she is of a gender other than his/her biological gender, the parents are required by this legislation to provide transgender medical services to the child or risk the child being removed from the home.

The reality, too, is that many children do resist parental direction as a part of the growing up process. As a result they may experience “mental and emotional” discomfort when their parents insist that they do as instructed. This parent/child conflict could, under provisions of the bill, lead to the removal of the child from the home.

Unlike the previous Act, a child’s religion is no longer a factor to be considered in determining the child’s best interest. That is, “religious faith” has been removed at nearly every reference contained in the previous Act. No longer can parents direct their child’s religion, but rather it is the “child’s creed” that is to be taken into consideration when determining the needs of a child. This provision will create conflict within the family over such issues as abortion, gender identity or even assisted suicide if the child decides that is what he/she wishes. The inclusion of children in the assisted suicide legislation is currently being heavily advocated.

This proposed legislation is a nightmare waiting to happen.

Further, under this proposed legislation, CAS is required to “consult with the child” in accordance to his/her age and maturity. The legislation lists in detail, in Part II of the Bill (s.3 to s. 14), the rights of the child, but provides no balancing provisions outlining the rights of a parent.

Although the proposed legislation does state