Children's Advocate confirms investigation into case of teen abused, impregnanted by stepfather
WARNING: Contains graphic details
Manitoba's Office of the Children's Advocate is confirming that they are investigating the case of a teenage girl who received two abortions before the age of 13 without intervention, but their investigation – whatever it finds – will not be made public.
The provincial agency disclosed Tuesday that it is now investigating a possible breakdown in the delivery of child welfare services but that the agency won't be able to implement recommended changes to the system unless new legislation gives them greater autonomy and transparency.
The province wants to find out why a 12-year-old girl, sexually assaulted at the hands of her stepfather was able to seek an abortion at a medical facility in Manitoba, without intervention from child welfare officials. The stepfather was charged last week to 16 years in prison for repeated sexual assault, among other offences.
- Stepfather who raped, impregnated young girl sentenced to 16 years
- Girl's sex abuse went undetected despite 2 abortions before age 13
When CBC News first reported the story, a spokesperson for the Children's Advocate called the case "deeply disturbing" and said the advocate was asking questions to the appropriate agencies about what happened and why. But their powers to disclose and report on their findings are limited.
The stepfather gained sole custody over his then 11-year-old stepdaughter. He repeatedly sexually assaulted her over a period of 26 months, impregnating her twice. One abortion was obtained in Newfoundland, the other in Manitoba.
Tuesday, the Office of the Children's Advocate took the rare next step of revealing that they are now fully investigating what – if anything – went wrong on their end of this situation. By moving to a full investigation, the agency can now do more than ask questions, and investigators also have the ability to request and review files connected to it.
The Children's Advocate decided to disclose that the agency moved to the investigation stage because of the publicity and disturbing nature of the case.
They will not, however, be able to make public the findings of their investigation, nor demand changes to child welfare protocols as a result of what they find. Instead, they'll only be able to report these findings back to the affected agencies.