MOVE TO RESCUE RUNAWAYS HIT WITH STORM OF PROTEST

VICTORIA - It was supposed to be the answer to a parent's nightmare, a
bill that would save lives by allowing children lost to prostitution
or drug addiction to be scooped up off the street and locked up for
treatment.

But the Secure Care Act, expected to be a winner for the New
Democratic Party government, has run into a storm of protest and drawn
new attention to the shortage of services for kids who are ready to
seek help but face only long waiting lists.

The bill passed Thursday in the last minutes of the session, only ten
days after it was introduced.

But the triumph turned into a major controversy as critics from the
children's advocate to the privacy commissioner condemned the
legislation and called for amendments before it's implemented.

The act allows a parent, guardian or the newly appointed director of
secure care to apply to a secure care board to have a child or youth
apprehended and held for up to 30 days. That initial term can be
extended by the board for an additional 60 days.

It also allows children and youths to be held for 72 hours without
board approval if the director of secure care decides that is necessary.

The problem is real. Parents have recounted harrowing stories of
children as young as 12 using heroin or living with pimps and their
own powerlessness to force their children to return home or accept any
form of treatment.

But the government's bill is under attack for ignoring the rights of
children and substituting crisis detention for adequate support for
children before they hit rock bottom.

Phil Bryden, a University of B.C. law professor, was on a 1998 task
force that supported 72-hour secure care. He said the group rejected
the long periods of detention provided for under the act.

"This was precisely what was on the table and precisely what the
majority thought was not a good idea," Bryden said.

The task force had concerns about the threats to youth's rights and
the effectiveness of forced treatment, he said. "Nobody has ever
demonstrated that that's a good treatment program," Bryden said.

Bryden said the bill's reliance on appointed boards creates the risk
children will be held against their will without adequate grounds.

"This is an enormously difficult job," Bryden said. If a board
releases a child who returns to the street and dies, the tendency will
be to order detention for more and more youths, he predicted.

Bryden said the legislation appears to have been hastily put together.
Only months ago, Children and Families Minister Gretchen Brewin said
the issue was too complicated to deal with this session.

Tim Agg, also a member of the task force, said he has written Brewin
with his concerns. Agg is executive director of the Pacific Legal
Education Association, a youth services agency that supports children
with significant needs.

Letting the state lock up children for long periods of treatment is
risky and unproven, he said.

Agg too said the courts, not appointed boards, should be deciding
whether children should be locked up. A three-month period of
detention is the same as most sentences for young offenders, he noted.

He predicted that the legislation is likely to be challenged in the
courts because it allows detention without judicial review. An Alberta
bill that allows the 72-hour detention of children involved in
prostitution is being challenged by two 17-year-old girls, who argues
it violates their Charter rights.

Agg shared the concern about how the legislation has been prepared.
"It's not at all clear what expertise or advice government has relied
on," he said.

Part of that advice came from Diane Sowden, a crusader for secure care
since her daughter ran away at 13 and bcame involved with drugs and
prostitution.

Sowden, founder of the Children of the Streets Society, has lobbied
the government for secure care and earlier this year organized
meetings for Brewin with groups of parents.

She was also the only task force member to call for detention for more
than 72 hours, arguing that children should be able to be held for up
to 30 days in extraordinary circumstances. But even Sowden said a
court order should be required to hold the children for longer than 72
hours.

But Sowden said critics of the legislation are missing the point -
that it will save children's lives.

The legislation would have saved her daughter - now 19 and off the
street and drugs - from years of suffering, she said.

Detention for 72 hours wouldn't work, she said, particularly for
drug-addicted youths. After three days they are still in the grip of
their addiction.

For many children, the threat of secure care will be enough to
convince them to accept help voluntarily, she said.

Sowden and most of the critics agree on one thing. Secure care isn't
going to work without a major increase in resources, both for the
children who will be held in care and young people who need help but
haven't yet hit bottom.

But Bryden said the process is backward. The task force heard
repeatedly that secure care shouldn't be introduced until there are
adequate resources for people who are seeking help and can't get it.

"It's a little bit shocking that you have the government about to come
up with $10 million for compulsory programs when people are
complaining about not being able to get their kids into public
programs," he said.

That's a complaint shared by Children's Advocate Joyce Preston and the
B.C. Civil Liberties Association.

Preston said the legislation shouldn't have been passed without a
commitment to provide the services needed to keep children from
reaching the desperate situations that justify secure care.

John Westwood of the civil liberties group said it's a "disgrace" that
the government is planning to scoop up children who are at risk
because it has failed to provide them with needed help.