“I just don’t get a good feeling when an agency which promotes itself as being “transparent and open to the public eye” is OVERLY SECRETIVE for nothing, ……… especially one which claims to be a NON PROFIT AGENCY!” ……
NB; In gathering information for this article – I did contact the QUEBEC Director of Youth Protection – “Batshaw Youth and Family Centers”, but I was INFORMED by them (even though it made no sense) that any “information” regarding how they administered their “User – Client” COMPLAINT PROCESS – was strictly CONFIDENTIAL and not accessible to the general public or me. Therefore, and obviously, the information available to me to complete this article was limited to journalistic “first hand experience/ research”, pertinent information from Batshaw users and finally the SPECIFIC INFORMATION that which Batshaw openly shared with me in order for me to complete this assignment – which was absolutely “NONE – “0” – “ZILCH“.
If you are a USER of “Batshaw Youth & Family Centers” and if you wish to share your experiences with the Batshaw Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner – feel free to contact me as I would appreciate it.
FOR THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE CONTACTED ME SO FAR:
*** THANK YOU FOR DOING SO. THIS SAID, PLEASE BE CAREFUL WHAT YOU WRITE (in the comments section) AS SITUATIONS WITH BATSHAW ARE DELICATE AND CONCERN CHILDREN/MINORS. AS LONG AS YOU REFRAIN FROM “EXPOSING” ANY “PERSONAL INFORMATION” THAT COULD “IDENTIFY YOUR CHILD”, THEN YOU ARE OBEYING THE LAW AND YOU ARE ACTING AS A RESPONSIBLE PARENT AND “I COMMEND YOU”.
PLEASE CONTINUE TO CONTACT THIS WRITER, AS I AM PREPARING A FURTHER AND OTHER EXPOSE (which due to your VOLUNTARY INPUT will hopefully be even more informative than this one).
*** AS AN OFFICIAL EXAMINER REPORTER, I NATURALLY ENCOURAGE AND SUPPORT ANY PARENT WISHING TO SHARE THEIR SITUATION ACCORDINGLY AND ***REST ASSURED THAT I WILL NOT WRITE ANYTHING HERE THAT COULD – IN ANY WAY – IDENTIFY YOU OR YOUR CHILDREN. GOD BLESS. STAY STRONG.
HOW MANY PEOPLE USE THE SERVICES OF BATSHAW ?
The Quebec Director of Youth Protection (more commonly known as “Batshaw Youth and Family Centers”) provides services to thousands of children, parents and families alike, this on a daily basis – and this estimate is a liberal one at best, as a much higher number might even be more accurate. Regardless, it goes without saying that any “entity” dealing with clients as fragile as those very specific USERS of Batshaw (children, parents and entire families), must require a minimum of some form of “training” and/or “professionalism” on the part of the administrators, – this to say the least.
WHAT COULD A MISTAKE COST “SOCIETY” – “YOU” – “OR ANY CHILD”?
Have you ever wondered what could happen, if and when someone working at Batshaw Youth and Family Centers – [The Quebec Director of Youth Protection] makes a critical error/ mistake in the “analysis of”, “direction of” – or perhaps the “closing of” a file / case? Yes, you’re right …. “given the fact that this agency deals with the SAFETY and PROTECTION of CHILDREN ….. an error, miscalculation or even a bad judgement call ….. could very well end up being a matter of LIFE and DEATH for a child in danger or jeopardy”;
One thing is for sure… after I read the 2 above mentioned articles and had listened to the ongoing NEWS REPORTS of same, I ended up with an “overwhelming, spine chilling sensation” this because these 3 innocent, victimized and vulnerable children could all have been saved, could have been rescued, could still be alive today – this if the very apparatus in place (Quebec Director of Youth Protection) would have acted with conscience, professionalism and in a preventive manner. The truth is that even after the school authorities alerted proper Youth Protection Officials…. the girls still ended up dead – this as the school principal (or school delegate) was told by Youth Protection Officials that the girl was too close to the age of maturity …… (about 6 months away)…. and because of that, the Quebec Youth Protection department were NOT going to do anything about the girls’ situation. Kinda makes one wonder about the possibility that the modern day YOUTH PROTECTION INDUSTRY, may just be more interested in LONG TERM PROFIT…. than saving children’s lives.
I’ve also been listening to media reports where “high ranking Batshaw Officials” have been distorting the entire ISSUE here, this by confusing the public into believing that an HONOR KILLING occurred and that WE (society) were simply not ready for / or familiar with that type of a MURDER…. so “oh well, guess we learned our lesson – right”? WRONG! This has NOTHING to do with how the girls were murdered. This has to do with the fact that these girls were in clear danger; the danger was reported to the Youth Protection System (Industry) on several occasions; there were many conversations between Youth Protection delegates and professionals in the community who were VERY concerned about the girls safety. That is what this is all about – not some shady excuse “HONOR KILLING” as to why Youth Protection was perhaps “unprepared” in this case to save the girls. The girls were being abused PHYSICALLY / PSYCHOLOGICALLY and this was reported a number of times to Youth Protection. What we don’t know is HOW MANY TIMES YOUTH PROTECTION WAS NOTIFIED ABOUT THE GIRLS BUT THEY MAY HAVE REFUSED TO EVEN ACCEPT THE REPORTING / SIGNALEMENT – which is what we seem to be hearing from more and more people.
(NB: remember, the LAWFUL DUTY OF THE QUEBEC YOUTH PROTECTION SYSTEM IS TO – “PROTECT CHILDREN”. Whatsmore, the Youth Protection Act (THE LAW) states that “every decision taken by anyone which affects a child – “MUST be taken in the child’s best interests” / – in other words, “what would be best for the child”/ what action would “best serve the particular needs of the child” – – – AND NOT THE POSSIBLE “INTERESTS ($$$$$$$) PROFIT” OF THOSE MANAGING THE YOUTH PROTECTION SYSTEM / INDUSTRY.
WAS IT IN THE “BEST INTERESTS OF THE SHAFIA CHILDREN” WHEN BATSHAW DECIDED TO CLOSE THE FILE ON THEM?
WHAT HAPPENED TO THESE POOR INNOCENT CHILDREN SHORTLY AFTER THE FILE WAS CLOSED?
RIGHT AGAIN! THEY WERE LEFT TO THE WOLVES AND KILLED / MURDERED, but not before they suffered ongoing physical, emotional and psychological abuse – this by their very own family members (which abuse was clearly and officially reported to Batshaw Youth and Family Centers) but nonetheless, BATSHAW TOOK THE DECISION TO CLOSE THE FILE.
WHAT CAN YOU DO IF YOU’RE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE SERVICES?
The Shafia case is one which should haunt BATSHAW for years to come – this if anyone working there has even the slightest of a conscience; but what about situations where serious harm or death isn’t so sudden? What about situations where a “simple correction” or a “timely intervention” could reasonably resolve a problem affecting a USER directly (children, parent or family member alike)? Is there a mechanism in place that a User could benefit from this to “address” or “deal with” something of this nature? Is there an avenue that any Batshaw USER could exercise, this to bring to someone’s attention “an action” or “a decision” – that was taken by someone (Batshaw “staff member”) which a USER may feel has affected them or their child(ren) in a negative manner? What if you or your child(ren) were receiving services from Batshaw and you (as a responsible parent) felt that “things were just not happening as you had expected”….. and that maybe you or your child(ren) were NOT receiving appropriate or acceptable services from the agency …. or that a Batshaw staff member may have taken a decision or action that affects you or your child directly and in a negative manner?
What could / would you do? . . . . . Where could / would you go? . . . . . . Who could / would you speak to? If you did find such an entity, would your concerns be addressed in an “unbiased“, “impartial“, “expeditious” and “fair manner“….. or would you be forced to deal with a “self protecting”, “biased”, “partial”, and “ineffective entity?” Naturally, an agency protecting / dealing with the lives of children province wide, MUST HAVE AN EFFECTIVE REDRESS / RESOLUTION PROCESS. . . . . . RIGHT? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . READ ON . . . . . . . . . . . . .
OFFICE OF THE LOCAL SERVICE QUALITY & COMPLAINTS COMMISSIONER
Well, after researching this subject, it does seem that there is such a “department” at Batshaw Youth and Family Centers which deals with “user complaints”, which department is more commonly known as the “Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner” – and administered by the Quebec Government assigned Local Commissioner – Elizabeth Pusztaii as well as her departmental support staff – Rosanna Strippa, Julia Pare, and Rosemay St. Fort. Upon further investigation, it also seems that this “very vague and broad responding department” exercises the legal authority to deal directly with “complaints” from users about specific situations where a user may feel that they or their child(ren) have been affected negatively – this by an action or decision of a Batshaw staff member / employee. In other words “It is this very department which is the “HUB OF FAIRNESS” and “ENSURING A SENSE OF ACCOUNTABILITY” – this with respect to how its STAFF MEMBERS may or may not take actions / decisions which affect the lives of CHILDREN, PARENTS and FAMILIES DIRECTLY!! This said, it goes without saying that when a user complains about “an ACTION / DECISION that any Batshaw staff member has taken which the user feels has affected them or their child(ren) negatively”, – that this complaint should be registered as being a complaint about the “judgement call ability” / “decision making capacity” of the person / staff member who took the action / decision which affected the USER negatively / directly; and not “hidden / lost” within the system as a complaint “registered / coded as” a complaint dealing with some far off subject regarding Batshaw policy or procedure (N.B. click here to see a few select but very important – Batshaw Youth and Family Centers Policies / Procedures – including section # 4.20.1 – – THE HANDLING OF CLIENT COMPLAINTS). Coding or dealing with complaints in a manner so as to camouflage the nature of the complaint (hiding a possible staff members UNETHICAL, IMMORAL or perhaps even CRIMINAL actions towards a USER) could have detrimental effects on the image / integrity / credibility of the entire structure of Batshaw Youth and Family Centers – better known as “THE AGENCY” – including and especially the Batshaw Complaint Process, and would do nothing to ensure the protection or safety of any child, parent or family member alike, nor would such an action facilitate the discovery or correction of any possible long standing weaknesses/ problems within the “AGENCY” – such as “closing the file of a CHILD” – especially if it is done against said child’s best interest, – which would clearly be a violation of the Quebec Youth Protection act
ACCOUNTABILITY – ANY FUTURE REVIEW . . . .
Whatsmore, if the Batshaw Youth and Family Center’s Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner were “assigning” and “coding” complaints under a REAL and TRULY APPROPRIATE “classification code”, this would undoubtedly ensure that any future study/ review of the complaint process be carried out in a manner permitting those doing such a review – to at least be able to understand where, if any, the “problems lie” and/ or “what is causing the system to either work or fail”… allowing any reviewer to not have to conduct an entire INTERNAL AUDIT or take a wild guess – this when dealing with “things which affect people’s (HUMAN BEINGS) lives directly”. Understandably, although no “AGENCY” is without problems, Batshaw most certainly doesn’t have a clean record – not by a long shot – see:
This submission is the first regarding the Batshaw “Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner” and thus we will be following up with further and other articles about both; (a) how complaints may or may not be managed / processed or dealt with by said office and (b) how Batshaw Youth and Family Centers treats users (children, parents and families alike) who make complaints about actions / decisions of their “AGENCY” and / or “STAFF MEMBERS”. Finally, if we can, we might also take a look at some very critical information which might prompt you to “ask yourself” – what is “the norm” regarding what is FAIR, REASONABLE, MORALLY and ETHICALLY acceptable when processing USER complaints at Batshaw. In no time at all, you the reader will have a mountain of information at your finger tips, which will most certainly permit you to answer one very simple question…. – “Is Batshaw Youth and Family Centers [BYFC] TRULY aiding, assisting and counseling those who use their services or could / would Batshaw ever OBSTRUCT USERS from receiving said services – intentionally or not PROLONGING THE USERS INVOLVEMENT WITH THE QUEBEC YOUTH PROTECTION INDUSTRY?” …………”READ ON“…………..
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF A “PARENT” ATTEMPTED TO MAKE USE OF THE SERVICES OF THE “BATSHAW OFFICE OF THE LOCAL SERVICE QUALITY & COMPLAINTS COMMISSIONER” – BUT THAT PARENT WAS REFUSED / DISCOURAGED / BLOCKED FROM DOING SO?
Although I have received a lot of information directly from users of the Batshaw Youth and Family centers, I’ve been particularly concerned about a situation that a Batshaw user presented to me recently. In fact, this situation appalled me so much, that I felt it imperative to share this with our readers, this to allow you (the reader) to be able to become informed – allowing you the possibility of having your own personal opinion – this with respect to “just how moral, ethical, respectful and fair the Batshaw Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner treats its users” – this when providing them an avenue of redress to rectify and / or correct things the User may feel are affecting them or their child(ren) negatively. Let’s take a moment here to review a specific situation….. and you decide if it’s a good example of Batshaw treating the User / Child, Parent or Family in a fair, reasonable, ethically and morally correct manner or if it is a situation demonstrating exactly the opposite!
Let’s take a look at the facts:
1. On March 13th 2012 around 3pm, a Parent was advised by Harley Schwartz – Batshaw manager – that he (Mr. Schwartz) was cancelling the visit scheduled for March 15th 2012 between the Parent and Child. Mr Schwartz simply left a voicemail message for the Parent advising them of this. Prior to taking said decision, there was absolutely NO attempt by Harley Schwartz, this to ensure that the Parent be given an opportunity to “give input” into the decision making process. In taking this decision, Harley Schwartz effectively BLOCKED the Parent from being able to “have a say – give input – be heard” in the intervention / decision making process of their child; – this in complete violation of the PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE – PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS and totally against the Youth Protection Act.
2. On March 14th 2012 the Parent did send an email alerting the highest ranking officials at Batshaw Youth and Family Centers / BYFC, namely – (a) Margaret Douek – BYFC Executive Director, (b) Madeleine Berard – BYFC Director of Youth Protection, (c) Susan Adams – BYFC Assistant Director of Youth Protection; that a visit scheduled on March 15th 2012 between the Parent and child had been UNFAIRLY CANCELLED by Harley Schwartz – Batshaw manager;
3. On March 16th 2012 the Parent did send another email – this to again advise these same officials at Batshaw Youth and Family Centers / BYFC + as well as an investigator at the Quebec Human Rights Commission; [namely – (a) Margaret Douek / BYFC Executive Director, (b) Madeleine Berard / BYFC Director of Youth Protection, (c) Susan Adams / BYFC Assistant Director of Youth Protection and (d) Miss Louise Sirois / Investigator at the Quebec Human Rights Commission] – that a Batshaw staff member / Harley Schwartz – effectively cancelled the visit scheduled on March 15th 2012 between the Parent and Child – this in an unacceptable manner, this by denying the Parent an opportunity to be heard in the decision making process (not letting the Parent be heard or give any input into the decision making process), – but at the same time “while using INPUT / INFORMATION that was SOLELY created/ generated by Batshaw”; the Parent equally felt that Mr. Schwartz’s actions in the child’s file/ case were extremely abusive in nature – especially since Mr. Schwartz has petitioned the Quebec Youth Court many times since he became involved in the child’s file – constantly trying to SUSPEND / END all visits / contacts between the Child and the Parent – which PETITIONS were ALWAYS DENIED by the QUEBEC YOUTH COURT – who, in exercising their lawful mandate – “ORDERED THAT THE VISITS / CONTACTS BETWEEN THE CHILD AND PARENT BE ENCOURAGED, MAINTAINED AND CONTINUED – which decisions were always taken in the BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD”.
4. On March 16th 2012 the Parent did equally submit a formal complaint to the Batshaw Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner – this in an attempt to complain about Harley Schwartz (Batshaw staff member) – who UNFAIRLY cancelled a visit scheduled for March 15th 2012 between the Child and Parent, this while DENYING the parent their right to “be heard” / “give input” into the decision making process relating to their Child’s file at Batshaw;
5. On March 20th 2012 the Parent did send an email to Miss Elizabeth Pusztai – the official Batshaw Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner – confirming that on March 16th 2012 the Parent did SUBMIT to her – a formal complaint against Harley Schwartz (the Batshaw manager in the Child’s file) – this because Mr. Schwartz neglected to respect the Child and Parent / or treat them FAIRLY in the decision making process of the Child’s file at Batshaw; ***The parent made it perfectly clear that they were NOT complaining about anything else “except a VIOLATION by Harley Schwartz (Batshaw manager) to the child’s / families right to “be respected in any decision making process”.
6. On March 28th 2012 the Parent finally had an opportunity to speak with Miss Elizabeth Pusztai (Batshaw Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner), wherein the Parent was clearly advised by her that “the fact that Harley Schwartz went ahead and UNFAIRLY cancelled the visit between the Child and Parent, this in an UNFAIR manner denying the Parent the right to be an informed participant in the decision making process of their child” – WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PARENT HAD A RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT ! In fact, the Parent was told by Elizabeth Pusztai “THAT THE COMPLAINT WAS BEING REJECTED” and that “NO LETTER OF DECISION WOULD BE SENT TO THE PARENT”, this since Miss Pusztai had determined that “THE SUBJECT MATTER WAS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PARENT HAD THE RIGHT TO COMPLAIN ABOUT”.
7. On March 29th 2012 the Parent did send another email to Miss Elizabeth Pusztai – the official Batshaw Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner – confirming that on March 28th 2012 when they spoke on the phone – that Miss Pusztai did confirm to the parent that the complaint against Mr. Harley Schwartz (Batshaw manager) submitted on March 16th 2012 was being DENIED for the reasons that the Parent had “no right to complain about the actions of Harley Schwartz” – COMPLAINT REJECTED / NO RIGHT TO COMPLAIN;
8. On March 29th 2012 the parent did send an email – this to confirm that on March 28th 2012 – they did speak with Miss Danielle Morency – Office of the Quebec Ombudsman, confirming that Miss Elizabeth Pusztai – (the official Batshaw Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner) – did REFUSE to ACCEPT and TREAT the COMPLAINT against Harley Schwartz (Batshaw manager) – whereby the Parent was informed by Miss Pusztai – that she WOULD NOT ACCEPT or PROCESS the complaint – simply because it was NOT SOMETHING THE PARENT COULD COMPLAIN ABOUT!; the Parent equally mentioned how – right after the complaint against Mr. Schwartz was REFUSED / DENIED by Miss Puzstai – how the Parent was contacted by Mr. Schwartz the very next day (2 minutes prior to another visit being held that day between the Parent and Child) and informed by Mr. Schwartz that NOW the visit scheduled for THAT DAY between the Child and Parent was also BEING CANCELLED BY MR. SCHWARTZ;
9. On April 16th 2012 Miss Elizabeth Pusztai / Batshaw Local Quality and Complaints Commissioner – WROTE a response letter to the Parent stating that “YOUR DISSATISFACTION WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE COURT ORDERED MEASURES ………. CANNOT BE HANDLED BY MY OFFICE“. This letter was ONLY drafted and sent to the parent, this following the Parent having communicated with Miss Danielle Morency of the Office of the Quebec Ombudsman, who thereafter contacted Miss Pusztai, asking that – even if Miss Pusztai felt that “this was NOT something a Parent had the right to complain about” ….. that she (Miss Pusztai) nonetheless provide the Parent with an official written response with respect to same, to which Miss Pusztai agreed to do;
* * * Who would have dreamed / guessed that the response letter from the Batshaw Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner (Elizabeth Pusztai) would have the effect of “completely changing the very context (meaning) of the Parent’s ORIGINAL COMPLAINT” !
ELIZABETH PUSZTAI’S RESPONSE LETTER IS A TELLTALE SIGN OF HOW BATSHAW YOUTH AND FAMILY CENTERS – MAY OR MAY NOT – “DISTORT”, “MODIFY” OR “ALTER” ANY INFORMATION THEY ACQUIRE FROM ANYONE / ANYWHERE – – – – (no matter how CLEAR and SPECIFIC the information was upon intake) – – – – AND THEREAFTER CREATE AND PRESENT A “BATSHAW WORLD” VERSION TO USE IN ANYWAY THEY DEEM NECESSARY …… <to pursue Batshaw World agendas / interests> ……………. NO MATTER IF SAID PRACTICE COULD APPEAR TO BE IMMORAL, UNETHICAL, UNFAIR, OR EVEN CRIMINAL IN NATURE (as only a judge could ever determine that!)
SO, AFTER READING THE SYNOPSIS AND REFERRING TO THE APPROPRIATE DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE HERE IN THE SLIDESHOW …. WHAT DO YOU THINK?
WASN’T THE PARENT SIMPLY ATTEMPTING TO EXERCISE THEIR RIGHT TO “FILE A COMPLAINT WITH BATSHAW” – THIS REGARDING MR. SCHWARTZ HAVING TAKEN AN “UNFAIR DECISION” WHICH AFFECTED BOTH THE CHILD AND THE PARENT NEGATIVELY – this without respecting the families right to PROCEDURAL FAIRNESS – disallowing the Parent an opportunity “to be heard” – “to give input into the decision making process” – which resulted in the family being treated in a clearly UNFAIR MANNER – denying them their right to be recognized, respected and heard in the decision making process”!
IS THIS HOW BATSHAW TREATS / RESPECTS CHILDREN?
NB: Procedural Fairness is a principle of law based at protecting a person’s right to be treated fairly in all processes which affect them directly”, especially any governmental actions accordingly.
WAS IT FAIR – ETHICAL OR MORALLY CORRECT FOR MISS PUSZTAI TO REFUSE TO ACCEPT A COMPLAINT AGAINST A FELLOW BATSHAW STAFF MEMBER AND THEN TYPE UP A BEAUTIFUL RESPONSE LETTER – “CHANGING THE CONTEXT OF THE COMPLAINT COMPLETELY” from “A COMPLAINT AGAINST THE ACTIONS OF HARLEY SCHWARTZ” – – – – to “A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE APPLICATION OF THE COURT ORDERED MEASURES” ?
THE VERY IMPERATIVE CHARACTERISTIC NEEDED BY ANY “LOCAL QUALITY AND COMPLAINTS COMMISSIONER” – IS TO ACT FAIRLY AND TO DEMONSTRATE THE ABILITY TO ACT IMPARTIAL IN THEIR DECISION MAKING.
IF ANYONE WORKING IN THIS FIELD DOES NOT HAVE AND / OR REFUSES TO EXERCISE THEIR DUTIES IN A MANNER DEMONSTRATING ADHERENCE TO AND RESPECT FOR THE PRINCIPLES OF “FAIRNESS & IMPARTIALITY”, – – – – THEN THEY MAY BE ABLE TO FREELY AND OPENLY “ACT UNFAIR, PARTIAL AND BIASED . . . . . . PERHAPS EVEN TO THE POINT OF SABOTAGING THE ENTIRE BATSHAW LOCAL SERVICE, QUALITY AND COMPLAINTS PROCESS ENTIRELY“.
WAIT A MINUTE ! ! ! – – – – – “IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD” ? ? ?
Treating the family in an unfair manner – disallowing the family to “be heard” in all decisions which affect them “is a clear VIOLATION of articles 6 and 2.4 (4) of the QUEBEC YOUTH PROTECTION ACT and also articles 10 and 4.8 of the QUEBEC HEALTH AND SOCIAL SERVICES ACT”; Anyone acting in this manner – may be acting “outside of the law” – OR “illegally”…. WHAT DO YOU THINK? – – – – or do the laws of Canada simply and ONLY apply to a select few of underprivileged citizens?
KEEP THE EXAMPLES COMING – YOU’RE HELPING OTHERS
There will be more examples of how effective and fair the Batshaw Complaint procedure is in the near future …. but in the meantime – take a gander at the following – as it may give you some helpful hints that you might find very useful and don’t forget to visit your local office of CAAP-ILE DE MONTREAL / Centre d’assistance et d’accompagnement aux plaintes – http://www.caap-mcq.qc.ca/fr/accueil.asp – which is the or email them here at email@example.com
Whom should you contact to make a complaint?
If you are dissatisfied with the services you or your child is receiving, you can address the question with the staff or the professionals in the institution involved. This simple procedure may often lead to an acceptable solution. However, if this does not satisfy you, you can contact the local or regional service quality and complaints commissioner (** If you are a Batshaw user – you can call 514-989-1885 and ask for the Office of the Local Service Quality and Complaints Commissioner or Miss Elizabeth Pusztai.)
What is a user?
A user is a person who receives, has received, or should have received services from a health and social services institution, or a person who requires these services. In fact, the user(s) could be you and your children.
Who can make a complaint?
Any user of health services and social services;
- The representative of a user;
- The heir or the legal representatives of a deceased user.
The local service quality and complaints commissioner
You can forward your complaint to the local commissioner if it involves:
- regarding the services offered by an institution,
- an intermediate and family-type resources
- an organization (other than that referred to the regional level), corporation or person which the institution uses).
Contact the institution for the name of the local service quality and complaints commissioner that receives and processes complaints. You can file a complaint in written or verbal.
As a last resort, contact the Ombudsperson
If you disagree with the answers of the local or regional service quality and complaints commissioner or if you have not received an answer from them within a period of 45 days, or if the institution or the Agency has not provided satisfactory follow-up to the recommendations of the service quality and complaints commissioner, you can contact the Ombudsperson. The latter will conduct a new examination of your complaint.
Bureau de Québec
525 boul. René-Lévesque Est, suite 125
Québec (Québec) G1R 5Y4
Telephone: 418 643-2688
Toll-free number: 1 800 463-5070
Toll-free fax: 1 800 902-7130
THE QUEBEC OMBUDSMAN IS THE “SECOND LEVEL” AND THE “LAST RESORT” FOR ANYONE (child, parent or family member) WHO FEELS THEY HAVE BEEN WRONGED BY BATSHAW – OR WHO IS OF THE OPINION THAT THEY HAVE NOT RECEIVED APPROPRIATE SERVICES FROM BATSHAW OR WHO BELIEVE THAT BATSHAW HAS TAKEN A DECISION OR ACTION WHICH AFFECTS THEM DIRECTLY – THIS IN A NEGATIVE MANNER – AND IN AN UNFAIR WAY!
WHO ARE THE QUEBEC OMBUDSMAN’S OFFICE ?…… HOW FAIR ARE THEY?
HOW DO THEY PROCESS “2ND LEVEL COMPLAINTS” FROM BATSHAW USERS?
. . . . . STAY TUNED TO THIS BAT CHANNEL TO FIND OUT MORE AS THE PARENT WHO WAS BLOCKED TO SUBMIT A COMPLAINT AGAINST A BATSHAW STAFF MEMBER (the parent being denied by that staff member to have INPUT into the decision making process of their child’s file at Batshaw) – HAS SUBMITTED THEIR COMPLAINT (one month ago now already…..) TO THE QUEBEC OMBUDSMAN’S OFFICE TO THE ATTENTION OF DANIELLE MORENCY – BUT IS STILL AWAITING ANY NEWS …… ……….. nonetheless, remember one thing ……………
Here THE READER decides for themselves what is RIGHT and what is WRONG! – not the MONEY! -and most certainly NOT the POLITICIANS nor the POWER!
ps: WE WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF YOU – THE READER – WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THIS ARTICLE TRANSLATED INTO FRENCH – THIS TO BETTER SERVE THE AREA WHERE THE ARTICLE RELATES TO – MONTREAL, QUEBEC, CANADA. FEEL FREE TO LEAVE A COMMENT ABOUT THIS… AS WE ARE 100% AWARE OF THE LINGUISTIC REALITY THAT WHICH IS PRESENT IN MONTREAL.