The Childcare and Protection Agency (CPA) has launched an investigation into how an unauthorised person was allowed to counsel at least one client and her children at its East Bank Office, located in the old Ministry of Human Services and Social Security building on Cornhill Street.
Deputy Director of the agency Tionna October told Stabroek News yesterday that an investigation has been launched into the individual’s presence at the Cornhill Street office up to Tuesday, where he met with a client. It is understood that the man, who told the woman that he is on call with the agency two times a week, is not employed with the agency and had no grounds to meet with its client.
According to October, the man’s presence and his reportedly meeting with clients had not been authorised by the agency’s Broad Street head office and he is not employed with the agency in any capacity. The investigation will be focused on who authorised him to be at the office and also to ascertain how many of the agency’s clients he met with and has purportedly counselled.
A source, who is familiar with the operation of the agency, told this newspaper that a serious breach occurred in having the man meeting with the agency’s clients, who are often times some of the most vulnerable persons in society. It is understood that a supervisor at the Cornhill Street office, with whom the man is acquainted, may have been the one responsible for his presence.
“Not because he has completed psychology studies means you are ready to work in the field. And he did a work attachment there, meaning he was under supervision and that finished ages ago. He has no right to be there and certainly not meeting with clients unsupervised. A serious breach has occurred there,” the source told this newspaper.
The woman, a mother of three, who was taken to the agency by the father of her children, became concerned on Tuesday when she was told by the man that he was going to recommend to a magistrate that a restraining order not be granted against the man in regards to his children. She explained that a summons was issued for the man to attend court but the police have been unable to serve him. She also said she wanted a protection order against the man since he has threatened her life but after listening to her the magistrate said the order would be granted for the children since the threat was made through them.
“I told him this and he told me that he would recommend that the magistrate not issue the order because the father is making progress…,” the concerned woman told Stabroek News.
The source pointed out to this newspaper that such utterances from that man are more than concerning as that is not the manner in which the agency operates.
The woman also told this newspaper of other concerning utterances made by the man, whom she met with twice in less than a week.
“As I said we are investigating how [name of the man] managed to meet with the agency clients and his words are in no way representative of the agency,” October said when asked about the man’s statements by this newspaper.
The client also told this newspaper that she is afraid for her life because of the threats made by the father of her children, which includes him saying he would chop her head off.
She said she received a call from the agency on Monday and was told that she was needed at the agency and that she would meet with the named man.
“I was tired. I was weak. But you don’t say no when Childcare call you. I specifically asked them if the father of the children will be there and I was told no. When I turned up, he was there with his wife and I was very concerned because as I said I am afraid of this man. I fearful for my life! So it was [name of the psychologist] who met with us alone. And is then I told him that I had the summons…,” the woman said.
Told about this, October said that the scenario should not have occurred as if the woman expressed fear and had actually moved to the court for a protective order then she should not have been invited to be in the same room with the man.
The client also said when she was first called about the father of the children and was told he had gone to the agency to make a report of the children being missing from his home she was very angry as she has court-ordered custody of the children. She explained this to the officer and she was told once she brings the custody order and it is proven that she has custody and the children could not have been missing from the father’s home, as he has visitation rights, then the agency “would leave [her] alone”.
The custody order along with the children’s birth certificates were taken to the meeting and at that time she said they met with a female childcare officer, the supposed psychologist and the father of her children and his wife. The children were interviewed and they were very open about the attitude of their father and at the end the father and his wife were told that they need parenting counselling because of how they behaved in front of the children.
“I thought that was it so I was surprised when they called me again but as I said when Childcare calls you, you don’t say no,” the woman said.
And she was even told by the supposed psychologist that he would recommend that they have shared custody and that he determined that she, who is married to someone else, was still in love with the father of her children.
“Now that I getting to understand that he had no right to be there and telling me all though things I want this thing to be made public because I don’t know how many more people, including children, he met with and now they are worse off than they were before. This is just so wrong…” the woman said.
