No hope in Children’s Authority?

THE EDITOR: The Children’s Authority is the premier organisation in Trinidad and Tobago for the care and protection of children. The powers and functions of the authority are clearly set out in the Children’s Authority Act, which established the authority and bestowed on it the responsibility to “provide care, protection and rehabilitation of children.”

Among its functions are “to investigate complaints or reports of mistreatment of children” and “upon investigation, remove a child from his home where it is shown that the child is in imminent danger.”

The authority has confirmed that it received a report regarding seven-year-old Mc Kenzie Hope Rechia. The authority’s annual reports detail the procedure when a report is received by its registry. The registry’s staff determines whether the child is in imminent danger, in which case the matter is referred to the authority’s emergency response team (ERT), which operates on a 24-hour basis.

The ERT must commence an immediate investigation and, if it is deemed necessary, remove the child from the dangerous situation. The ERT works closely with the Child Protection Unit (CPU) of the Police Service. The authority does not require the intervention of the CPU to respond to a report, unless it determines the situation poses a risk to the safety of the authority’s staff.

Nothing suggests that that was the case. Instead of moving to protect the child, the authority is reported to have said it contacted the police and that it began case management. We have heard of no visit being made to Hope’s home or any attempt to contact her family.

If a determination is made by the registry’s staff that a child is not in imminent danger, the case is referred to the authority’s investigations team for follow-up action to determine what support services could be made available to the child and her family through the Child and Family Services Unit. Since Hope was not removed, one can assume that such determination was made. In that case, what services were provided to Hope and her family? We learnt of none.

The Children’s Authority cannot and must not be allowed to engage in a Pontius Pilate hand-washing strategy by stating it had contacted the police. Once the authority received that call regarding Hope’s situation, its responsibility to act in Hope’s best interests began and it remained with the authority.

How many more children must die before the Children’s Authority understands and plays its role to provide care, protection and rehabilitation of children?

HAZEL THOMPSON-AHYE

senator