Son's ashes exposed to 'indignity' at Vancouver airport screening.

By Jack Knox, Victoria Times Colonist January 22, 2015

Rhett Mutch in a family photo: He was shot by police

in an incident being investigated by the Independent
Investigations Office of B.C.
Photograph by: Submitted , Victoria Times Colonist
VICTORIA Marney Mutch wanted to keep her sons ashes
with her when she flew, but didnt want to carry them in a
cremation urn.
An urn is awkward to carry and draws awkward looks from others. Mutch, whose 20-year-old
son Rhett was shot by Victoria police in the familys James Bay home in November, wanted to
travel with something less conspicuous and more personal.
So Mutch placed the ashes, enclosed in sealed plastic, inside a stuffed toy a heart-covered
ladybug that she had given Rhett on Valentines Day several years ago. It seemed appropriate.
She didnt expect her choice to lead to a traumatizing airport confrontation, a missed flight and,
now, an apology from the agency responsible for screening passengers. But shes still upset, left
shaking by what felt like a lack of humanity.
Mutch didnt want to be separated from her sons ashes when she travelled to see friends and
family in Ontario five weeks ago, and wouldnt risk losing an urn in checked baggage. So she
brought the Love Bug as carry-on, leaving the seam unsewn, making no attempt to disguise that
something was inside. In any event, it passed through security without notice.
She was asked about the stuffy during pre-boarding screening for her return flight from Toronto
on Sunday, though. Come over and Ill whisper it to you, Mutch replied. When she explained
herself, security staff melted and quietly ushered her through.
It was in Vancouver, clearing security before her connection to Victoria, that things got sticky.
When the screener stopped her, Mutch again explained herself and produced a certificate from
the funeral home. Not good enough. He said: You have to take them out.
Mutch balked. There was no way she was pulling Rhetts ashes out of the Love Bug in front of a
bunch of strangers.
Neither side budged. More security staff got involved and there was talk of bringing in the
RCMP. Mutch finally relented. I pulled out the bag, slapped it on the counter and said: Here are
my sons remains. The ashes were placed in a tray, run up a conveyor, then sent back down as

other passengers looked on. By the time it was all done, a distraught Mutch was too late to board
her plane. I had a major cry.
Its the indignity of it all, she said Wednesday. They treated it like it was a box of sand. This is
my son.
Mutch got a sympathetic ear when she complained to the Canadian Air Transport Security
Authority.
We have apologized to the passenger for the experience that she went through at pre-boarding
screening, spokesman Mathieu Larocque said from Ottawa.
CATSA is looking at security-camera footage and interviewing staff. Without pre-judging the
results of that investigation, and while pointing out that security staff have to screen everything
that goes in an aircraft, Larocque acknowledged that while there may be rules, there are also
ways to enforce them sensitively. For example, a passenger can be taken to a side room where
their belongings can be inspected without passersby gawking.
____________________________________________________________________________

Is it safe to be a free-range kid?

January 21, 2015.
Posted by:
Lori Welbourne
A mother and father are being investigated for neglect
after they allowed their six-year-old daughter and 10year-old son to walk home together from a playground
a mile away without adult supervision. Neighbours
called the police and child protection services to report
them.
The laws in Maryland, where this happened, prohibit children under the age of eight from being
left unattended in a vehicle or a home, and a child must be at least 13 years old to supervise a
younger one. Despite this, the educated, professional pair is defending their choice to free-range
parent a childrearing style that both my husband and I grew up with, and now our children
are growing up with as well.
Yet before reading this story in the news, I had never heard of the term free-range parenting
and simply considered our style to be somewhat old-school, reminiscent of the days when we
played unsupervised outside from morning to night. After learning of an actual label, I looked it
up.

Described as a common-sense approach to parenting in an overprotective era, it is almost the

opposite of whats been termed helicopter parenting, where children are monitored and
sometimes controlled continuously by their folks who hover over them.
Im not about to claim one style is better than the other. I think whats best depends on the
individual family, and in particular the kids. For us, the old-fashioned approach is working out
well so far. Sam and Daisy are confident individuals who for the most part make responsible
decisions, are self-reliant and dont take unnecessary risks. Not everyone agrees with our
choices, though.
I cant believe youd let them take public transit without you, one of my friends said recently.
A man was just stabbed to death on a city bus you know.
Yes, I do know. The tragic murder she referred to occurred in Kelowna 2 1/2 months ago and was
a shock to our community. But what were we supposed to do? Take away the independence our
11-year-old daughter and 14-year-old son have earned because of the remote possibility someone
might attack them? As weve also seen in the news, horrifying things can happen anywhere
even in their protective schools with teachers present.
This world we live in isnt 100-per-cent safe like the vast majority of us wish it was. But is it
worse than it used to be? From all the reports and statistics Ive read over the years, when it
comes to Canada and the U.S. it is not. It only seems like it is.
According to the Department of Justice, the crime level has dropped significantly and we are
now in line with the way it was in 1970. It is actually safer for our children to play outside than it
was for me when I was their age.
Lenore Skenazy, the author of Free-Range Kids, states that our society started believing children
were in constant danger after cable TV started showing abductions 24/7 and finding the
weirdest, saddest stories from around the world.
The internet prominently highlights a steady stream of that as well.
Its not just the fear of crime that scares us though. All the extra safety concerns were
bombarded with make us worry as well.
The current tobogganing restrictions and bans making news across North America illustrate this.
No one can deny there is a physical risk and liability issue when sledding, but risk exists with
just about any activity.
Look at that empty park, a cantankerous tour guide hollered up top a New York double-decker
bus I was once on. It used to be full of active children having fun. But all the so-called
dangerous equipment was replaced with safe boring stuff and they stopped coming. Now
theyre inside playing video games and watching the boob tube.

As parents, my husband and I could still be considered too protective compared to previous
generations. We thoroughly child-proofed our house, put gates on the stairs and even walked up
the ladder of the slide with our kids and caught them at the bottom when they first slid down. But
we also taught them what they shouldnt touch, how to navigate stairs and the safety rules at the
playground.
The older they got the more independence they wanted, so we helped them earn it.
None of us want our kids to experience any harm, but I believe overprotecting them and
perpetuating this feeling of living in fear could hurt them more in the end. Teaching them
responsibility and assisting in becoming self-sufficient is not neglect, its a rational parenting
decision.