She Lost her Children Because of Homework


Steven Bennett brings us another tragedy from the Norwegian CPS. These victims now have the courage and the support to come out and tell their stories! Read and be shocked:


“Vibeke Vedvik had all four children confiscated after she asked Norway’s CPS, Barnevernet for help. The reason she approached ‘social care’ was because her child was struggling to finish his homework. I’ll say it again – she lost her children because ‘not enough homework was being done’.

It often starts like this in Norway, you ask for help and they take your children. They then draw out the court cases and after so many months of manipulating and coercing the children in care, they tell the parents that the children have now attached themselves to the new ‘foster carers’.

It’s a sick, sick business in need of a remedy.

Vibeke loves her children so very much and is a wonderful mother with the same challenges that all parents have with raising children. She is one of 1000’s of parents who go through this kind of torture every year in Norway, but this is really the worst kind of torture that Vibeke and her children are going through right now, which would be hard for any one of us to imagine.

She has now got her two daughters back but she can only see her two sons four times a year under supervision in different foster homes.

The CPS recently wrote to Vibeke telling her, that if she doesn’t cause the CPS any trouble, she can keep her daughters and see the boys a little more often without supervision/guards. This is a very popular tactic used by Barnevernet. They take all the children first and then after a while they give you one or two of them back. The victim, in this case Vibeke is half relieved and it gives the CPS some form of security, as they’re effectively saying, play ball with us now, do what we say, and we can make life a little easier for you.

This ‘sickness of silence’ in Norway has to be remedied.

Families are being torn apart on a daily basis and so many people still choose to turn a blind eye. Let’s not be like those people, let’s be the solution and let’s pray for Vibeke and her children and the 1000’s of other parents who find themselves in a similar situation, but are too afraid to speak.

As a parent myself, I know exactly what it’s like when it comes to homework – and it can, at times be quite challenging for children in different development stages of their lives. Parenting is not any easy job. Someone once said that parenting is as crazy as circumnavigating the globe without a map….but, oh, what a journey! Sadly, in Norway, that journey is often cut short.”


Share and rise up in protest against this ideology of child confiscation!

Reposted with  permission from Steven Bennett

64 comments on “She Lost her Children Because of Homework

      • Do you? Is it true that the uncle send a copyset – the full – or a selected one – to addresses where the family might get support? I have read the way the lawyer in Houston handles information given, but I don’t know how selective he has been.

        • The problem with your argument Knut, at least in this forum, is that we ALL know how oppressive governments operate. Whether it be communist Romania or specific agencies in other countries. We know how government agencies with nearly unlimited power and no accountability can and do treat people. The only way to gain trust for such an agency is with GREAT transparency, not threats and secrecy, and certainly not blind defenses like ‘you don’t know what we claim they did’. Your cause is further lost in this case because many people do know the Bodnariu’s personally, or their families or their close friends. So there is much more transparency into their side.

          In fact, your arguments carry basically NO weight logically or morally until you can actually acknowledge that CPS could be wrong, and until you can identify a way in which it could be fairly determined to your satisfaction that they are. Reading court documents about the accusations by the CPS against them doesn’t work because, as I mentioned, we all know how oppressive governments work.

          Even with regard to the lawyer in Houston, you don’t say, ‘if this is true then CPS may have made mistakes’ you just argue that maybe there’s more information. As though the information presented isn’t concerning enough for any fair minded person.

    • The parents have access to the files. You do not have to go to the CPS archives in order to read the documents. When the children turn 15 years old, they have right to access to their case file, also.

      Knut Nygaard, you should be ashamed of yourself. You are an affront to decent Norwegians. Your BV-progaganda reeks of disingenuity and self-righteousness.

    • We haven’t read the files, but you said yourself in the previous thread:

      “The hardest cases for us in the CPS to witness is the parent who tries and does it’s best and ends up with a conclusion that it’s not good enough for the children – no alcohol or drugs, no violence or abuse – just the management of the daily life with children.”

      In other words there are cases where parents try their best, they aren’t violent nor are they abusive, they don’t use drugs or alcohol. Despite this Barnevernet decides that this is “not good enough for the children” and takes their children away.

      • Here is a link to the Norwegian child welfare act. Those cases I refer to in my comment is rooted in § 4-12a and sometimes with a link to d:
        A care order may be issued

        (a) if there are serious deficiencies in the daily care received by the child, or serious deficiencies in terms of the personal contact and security needed by a child of his or her age and development,

        (b) if the parents fail to ensure that a child who is ill, disabled or in special need of assistance receives the treatment and training required,

        (c) if the child is mistreated or subjected to other serious abuses at home, or

        (d) if it is highly probable that the child’s health or development may be seriously harmed because the parents are unable to take adequate responsibility for the child.
        Then you can check the wording in the legislation for that matter in your own country.

        • In other words, here are the loosely worded laws upon which we justify these terrible decisions. Lets look:

          “(a) if there are serious deficiencies in the daily care received by the child, or serious deficiencies in terms of the personal contact and security needed by a child of his or her age and development,”

          “serious deficiencies in terms of the personal contact”
          The CPS social worker or CPS paid psychologist decides you don’t make enough eye contact with your child

          “(d) if it is highly probable that the child’s health or development may be seriously harmed because the parents are unable to take adequate responsibility for the child.”

          “highly probable that the child’s … development MAY be seriously harmed”
          The CPS social worker decides your child isn’t doing well enough at school.

          This is a “law” that can justify virtually anything.

        • The d is seldom used alone, but if the parent or parents are what we call in Norway “lettere psykisk utviklingshemmet” – mentally retarded to a certain degree – the mother and parents is given a chance at a training place to show whether they are able to handle the daily care for the child or not – an assessment done in the present to prevent severe lack and damage in the future.
          The verdict is done in the county board where of cause the mother or parents do their best to prevent this to happen if that’s her/their wish, but often there is no protest and the mother or parents give their acceoptance – something that leeds to a simplified treatment of the case. Some of these children get adopted.

        • “(a) if there are serious deficiencies in the daily care received by the child, or serious deficiencies in terms of the personal contact and security needed by a child of his or her age and development,”

          “serious deficiencies in terms of the…. security needed”

          The Social Worker decides you’re too poor.

  1. It’s horrible what’s happening in Norway. Barnevernet is using trivial reasons to accuse parents and confiscate their children from them without any due process, any warning, or any social investigation. In Norway, victims who did not know each other said quite similar things about the government abuses. The very way evidence from a lot of different sources converged was a sign that it might be true. And it was!
    All the evidence about Barnevernet coming in from all sorts of families in Norway should have given the Norwegian authorities an important message, too.
    They should not have discarded it as unreliable. They should have gone into every single case long ago. Then they would have found enough sure evidence to point out what their obligation was: to stop Barnevernet. Immediately. Thousands of children would have been saved from these rotten outcomes if Norway had reformed its Child Welfare system to emphasize safe, proven programs to keep families together! Here is a letter to the Norwegian government:

    • It’s more horrible the work you and other spindoctors do to frighten people unnecessary. Of cause all mothers and fathers know why their kids no longer stay with them. They know the story behind and the reasons that led to the removal. I think many of these f.b.sites works as a kind of therapy, but they know that they must be selective in their information so they don’t loose the effect that they need.

      • Knut, as I posted on a previous article, when Norway’s own embassies post documents about visiting with family in which 75% of the document talks about CPS, the country knows it has a problem. Spin doctors not needed.

        Interesting side note, that link has since been removed from the embassy website (obviously, I saved a local copy of the document if anyone is ever interested again).

        Thanks to the Norwegian government for reading and ‘responding’ to my post, though 🙂

          Heheh, so they removed it?

          The internet took away the public press’ almost complete power of censorship and
          made it possible for people to make their voices heard more easily, however “imperfect” they and their voices might be. Before that, I can never remember that we were more than about a dozen or so individuals who managed anything like a sustained public protest against CPS abuses. Against us were and are tens of thousands of people employed in the system and supporters of the system, and the whole mighty machine of the powerful state itself. Nevertheless, when we occasionally managed to get an article accepted by some newspaper, an article not only containing an opinion but some information exposing the authorities, those in power got very upset and often tried to bully us. We felt heartened – they were kind of afraid of us! Of US, us little mice? It made us take heart. Didn’t the emperor have any clothes on?

          Hm, I didn’t make a copy of that one from India, but when they have removed it, it becomes even more interesting, so yes please, Matt, could you be bothered sending it to me? You find my mail address on my website.

        • By the way, 2012 was not the last time people protested in India, as you know – they held a protest now in January too:

          Before that, Suranya had been active re Czech Eva Michaláková’s case:
          Letter to Czech Embassy in New Delhi:

          Letter to Norwegian Embassy in New Delhi:

          Press release:
          When Suranya demonstrated in Delhi:

          She is one tough chicken. One must be allowed spontaneous, hollow laughter at Norway once in a while.

          So she was invited to the Czech Embassy when they celebrated the establishment of independent Czechoslovakia in 1918, and brought a congratulatory card with her:

        • In some countries you are run over if you act like we do in our pedestrian crossings. In some countries they drive in another way than you usually do. Some contries have criminality in another scale than you are used to. In Norway as in the other Western countries you don’t spank or use violence towards your children. I have not read the information you refer to, but I think it’s meant to be to inform newcomers that by crossing the border it’s smart to stop handling your kids as you did back home.
          In my years in the CPS I have never received concerns of anything that refers to tourists. We have noticed that families from Africa, Asia and Eastern Europe may handle their kids in a way that gives a concern of violence to the CPS months and years after their arrival.
          Nowadays – in a mulitcultural society – we expect a 100.000 not invited guests this year – we need to get out information in all kinds of languages about both the CPS service and the child protection law to help the parents to understand the not accepted limits of parental behavour in our society – as in Sweden, Denmark, GB and I hope in Australia, Canada and USA.

        • @Marianne
          You know they know it’s bad, then they have to remove it. You are very welcome! I’m glad you received, thanks for letting us know.

          @ Knut: Well, I would post the link again, but it seems the Norwegian government took it down as soon as it was brought to light. However, I can summarize it for you.
          page 1: Norway is a great place to visit with family.
          pages 2-4: Norwegian CPS is great, we have jurisdiction over your children as soon as you enter the country, but don’t worry you can appeal any decision to the County Governor. We follow many good (and unlisted standards). I searched the document for you, the words, discipline, spanking, and violence occur exactly ‘0’ times, so clearly the intent is NOT to help someone understand the actual laws before visiting.

          However, the point is the same, if the Norwegian government realizes it is SO out of step with the rest of the world that it has to spend 75% of a document like this talking about CPS, then perhaps the better approach to visitors who ‘violate’ your ‘laws’ would be to ask them to leave…not seize their children…just a thought.

      • The kids want to go home and stay with the parents but the corrupted Norwegian CPS does not alllow them. The longer they keep the Bodnariu and Nan’ children, the more they will be exposed. We’ll not stop. Nobody can stop us. We live in free countries and we are getting more knowledgeable on this subject every day. We trust the victims. We know when a person is a victim and when someone lies for we lived under Ceausescu regime, which was quite similar with Barnevernet’s ideology, except that our communist regime did not abuse the children, they did not kidnap the children even if you opposed the system, they arrested the man but did not touch the children. Other than that the mental torture methods were very similar with the ones you use at your job at Barnevernet. Another distinction was that our communists were atheists while some of Barnevernet employees are self-proclaimed “Christians”. So from this perspective, our Eastern European communist were more sincere. They were evil but they “honestly” believed that they were the ultimate authority in the universe.

      • No, Knut Nygaard, we do not know why our children are not staying with us. I have many times asked from Vestre Aker Children Welfare Service in Oslo why my daughter was taken from me seven years ago, and I have never gotten any other reply than a citation of the law text in section 4-12 litra a in The Children Welfare Act. They cannot give any reasons, and I suspect the real reason is the false accusation of sexual abuse that was directed against me by my mother. These accusations were thoroughly investigated by the police and the charges dropped with the comment not sufficient evidence but Vestre Aker Children Welfare Service decided to keep my daughter anyway. In Norway there is an obsession with sexual abuse. Luckily for them, s4-12 letter a 2nd alternative concerning emotional abuse can be used against any parent for any perceived neglect. It is convenient when the original accusation against the parents is no longer valid. Vibeke Bonne Øyri, the leader of barnevernet in Vestre Aker even tried to use s4-12 letter d against me but the lawyer of barnevernet had it removed. As you told us, Knut, this paragraph is used against parents who are mentally retarded to a certain extent (sic) which is correct. I thank you for your efforts to enlighten us, Knut Nygaard; Keep up the good work. You are actually doing the Bodnarius and all the other families persecuted by the CPS a great favour because everyone gets to see how weak your arguments actually are. Transparency is needed in order to disclose barnevernet. That is why I persevere in giving names. These people are public servants with access to the largest newspapers in Norway.

        I do not have the same opportunity to make my arguments known. The courts are closed and no journalists are allowed inside. Not even my close friends or relatives are allowed inside. I have to meet the judges and the accusers on my own. Yes, I do have a lawyer, but it is a win-win situation for the lawyer who gets paid no matter what the outcome is.

  2. Knut Nygaard,

    The question is not “what is in the files?” yet “what proof does Barnevernet have for what they put in the files?” It’s well known that children are making up stories all the time and they can be easily manipulated by Barnevernet’s social workers. CPS must have additional proofs before making such devastating decisions to remove children from family and expose them to high risks with the unlovely foster parents motivated by money.

    • The documents that are most informative are the conclusions. They tell us why the CPS have now done so and so – tells the history behind – measures tried so and so – usually for several years .. before …

      • Well, the CPS certainly did not try anything at all for several years before they deported Ruth and Marius Bodnariu’s children.
        (I foresee a possible argument now, claiming that the fact that they were taken suddenly and without warning is a PROOF of how terrible the parents and the grandparents and the home all were.)

        • We all know from the (selective??) insight this romenian lawyer in Houston has put on the inernet ( no he does not have duty silence to the parents – I think – because they are not his clients – he just got ( a selective ??) copyset sent over from ?? who let the whole world know parts of the story, but in Norway the parents won’t talk to the christian newspaper Dagen and then they couldn’t tell the story in a proper enough way – their lawyers don’t speak to the press – but who in the world get nearly all the information they need – from Houston. Texas. I hope the lawyer had got the green light from the parents and their lawyers.) that this acute intervention was done in cooperation with the police who acted out of the criminal law § 282 and the CPS acted from the child protection law § 4-6. 2- junction.

    • It is amazing that the argument is always completely based in the idea that the government can and should be believed, regardless of the history to the contrary. There is always an admission that he doesn’t know anything about the case, an argument that what we know can’t be true, and therefore that means the government is right…by some weird logic.

  3. Chris,

    I agree with all the comments you posted here. You have good points and you are documented. I have a suggestion. I think you should publish this study on your blog: It’s a study that Barnevernet agents (like Nygaard) refuse to read:

    Foster Care vs. Keeping Families Together: The Definitive Studies

    Click to access evidence.pdf

    Nygaard said that I should not believe those that are anti-Barnevernet over those that are pro-Barnevernet. Therefore, if one discovers criminal activity carried out by state employees and obviously becomes anti that institution, he is not credible because he is “openly proclaimed anti that institution”. Also, he said that in order to get informed about what’s going on in a country I have to be there. Therefore, all of us can not say anything about what’s happening in Iran, North Korea, Afganistan and Pakistan for none of us went over there. This is the type of logic some of Barneverent employees use.

  4. Nygaard lied when he said he was off for medical reasons. Now once he claims he started the job he is hyperactive on our webisites. They obviously fear not only losing their jobs but facing for the crimes against humanity Barnevernet agents are involved in. Destroying a family for trivial reasons as these presented in this articles is definately a crime.

    • If you as I are a christian we build our faith as the basis of al we do in our daily work and we should be occupied with other things than behave as spindoctors. We should tell the truth – instead of – as your position – tell the “truth” from the one part of the story.and mock the one voice that can give some balance.
      Isn’t it good that I’m well enough both to mange my daily work and bring you some information you seem to lack – or you don’t want informatiion – you see it as a challenge? From my window it looks like the air is getting out of your balloons.

  5. It’s not just a Norway thing here, but this is global. If any parent goes to any social worker in Canada or the US and asks for help, they will start a file, assess the “risk” to the children, question the mom or dad extensively, question the children, then next thing you know they are at your door with police to take the children away “for their protection”.

    It’s a global epidemic and nothing will change until money and power aren’t so important to these people.

    • Thank you for making this statement because I think it is very true. I have been focusing on Norway, but in the process I have come across CPS nightmare stories in the US as well. Certain states are more aggressive than others in confiscating children, but the underlying mentality is the same everywhere in CPS.

      They are quick to remove children instead of making all effort to fix issues and keep the kids in the home.

      I propose another factor: the industry has to do this in order to prove itself. They have an incentive to keep removing kids in order to justify their existence.

      • The more children they remove, the more money they receive. It’s an industry, and children are considered the gov’t’s property. How bad has it gotten? An Italian lady was forcibly sedated and received a C-section, where SW’s took her baby away even BEFORE it was born! Can you imagine? Starting to sound like China, doesn’t it? These people are monsters, and they are trained to deceived, lie and destroy.

        • Yes it was. The horror the poor mom went through. Let’s say she was a druggie…big deal! Give her help! Don’t rip her baby out of the supposed safest place on earth for a baby.

        • This is b…… We in the municipal CPS are the one’s that receives the concerns – to the investigates and do the conclusions – this is first line work done in every one of our 422 municipalities.
          When a case is concludes and the best possible content to the measure is fund we in the first line get these from individuals and since around 2000 – from firms that either have municipal address if it is a help measure given at the home address and from the state with a municipal deductible if the child is in our care.
          We have the care for a limited time in a childs life – in those years we are the parents careworkers – if the child want contact with it’s parents and family when out of our care they are of cause free to do so.
          I think you find something that resembles to this in your own national backyard.

        • I know a family in Canada whose children were taken into care for four years. It was a medical misdiagnosis, and the gov’t spent nearly 2 million dollars trying to destroy them. They came up with lies, made-up collateral witnesses, and lied to our children every chance they got.

          We work with families on a daily basis who are in the same situation. The story is always the same. An accident or a medical problem, then child protection steps in. Then the nightmare starts. Some poor parents don’t get their children back because they can’t afford lawyers or medical experts to help defend themselves.

          I figured you were in the thick of it somehow, Kurt. You are way too defensive to be a normal every day Joe.

          I guess you don’t bite the hand that feeds you, eh?

        • Something huh? What right do they have? Imagine the trauma the mom and baby went through? Now when an SW acts under the “protection of a child” (even though they don’t believe the baby is a person yet), the courts will justify them and they will get away with it.

          I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if this poor woman commits suicide.

  6. It was proven so many times that Barnevernet employees lied. For you to come here and tell us that the victims don’t tell the truth is a huge act of dishonesty. You know very well the inhumane practices Barnevernet is using. Even so, you struggle to potray it as a “good Samaritan” and incriminate the victims. You deceive yourself if you think that is Christianity. You know very well that thousands of children have been removed from families on no serious grounds and you still act as advocate of the Devil.

  7. “It’s a sick, sick business in need of a remedy.”

    I totally agree. In many cases parents are not allowed to see their children simply because they disagree with barnevernet. Barnevernet try to silence parents who voice opposition on the internet. Their children may have been taken from them for the flimsiest reason, but still the parents are not allowed to protest! I admire those parents who are not letting themselves be silenced by the threats of barnevernet. It is very hard not to see your children. Barnevernet do not care about the welfare of the children. It is all pretense.

  8. Warning – Knut Nygaard is No-Way (aka Norway) CPS employee with his duties streamed down to discredits people that talk against BV. Since all comes live on social media, CPS has their own representative (Knut) to answer everyone’s comment even they say that they are not going public with details about cases. You will be even more mortified, if this will be possible, at the comments he made against the young girl death. Maybe at the end of the day he can benefit from being in touch normal people and do the rest of the world a favor …. Back OFF

  9. Crista, can you please repost Nygaard’s comment on the 13 year old girl case?
    It may help us if we save that comment.

    Vibeke Vedvik, we will support you until you get all your children back. Don’t be afraid and don’t be silent! Your case shocked us and many people around us.

    • Thank you sooo much, I am sooo thankful 😍 And my boys will be it too when they can see this and see how many wonderful people who stood up and fight with us! 💖💪 I promise that every word Steven have written is true, many hundred people has read all the documents. And I’m holding nothing back.

      • It is of cause possible that the concern given to the local CPS said something about homework, but nowadays homework is considered a theme between school and home. When the theme is mentioned in consulting conversation the school will be told that helping a child with homework isn’t a CPS issue – we don’t provide measures for doing that instead of the school and the home.

        If we get a concern we most likely will open an investigation built on this paragraph: If there is reasonable cause to assume that there are circumstances, which may provide a basis for measures under this chapter, the child welfare service shall investigate the matter at the earliest opportunity; see the time limits set out in section 6-9.

        The investigation shall be carried out in such a way as to minimise the harm it causes to anyone affected, and it shall not have a wider scope than is justified by its purpose. Importance shall be attached to preventing the unnecessary spreading of information about the investigation.

        The parents or the person with whom the child is living may not oppose an investigation as mentioned in the first paragraph being carried out in the form of a visit paid to the home.

        The child welfare service may engage experts. Before the expert’s report is used as the basis for a decision to implement a measure under Chapter 4 of the Child Welfare Act, it shall be assessed by the Commission on Child Welfare Experts; see section 2-5. This shall not apply to interim orders in emergencies; see sections 4-6, 4-9 and 4-25. The expert’s report shall also be assessed by the Commission before it is used as the basis for a decision by the child welfare service to drop a case.

        The child welfare service, and experts whom it has appointed, may demand to speak with the child alone in a separate room. If there is suspicion that the child is being mistreated or subjected to other serious abuse at home (see section 4-12, first paragraph (c)), the child welfare service may order that the child shall be taken to a hospital or elsewhere for examination.

        Here things can move from A to B a.s.o. – the mother maybe get guidance – the CPS thinks she can’t handle the daily care after observations – and things can escalate from there. I don’t know the case – this is meant as an explanation.

        • Knut,

          You can quote as many sections as you wish. What most of the commenters on this blog are concerned about is the abuse of power. Why do you continually support an organization that has clearly run amok?

      • Vibeke, I know about your case from a diferrent sourse also. You have been a good parent for your kids. All BV agents involved in this unjustice should face criminal charges. You may contact me via email: octavianaz @ (with no space).
        Have a wonderful day!

  10. Knut Nygaard, you know exactly where fear comes from. So can you please tell me which part of Norway are you in? It would be great if you would tell us the city/ town where you live but I was curious to know at least the district you live/ work in. Thank you.

  11. Knut Nygaard wrote on
    MARCH 2, 2016 @ 8:50 AM:
    “The d is seldom used alone, but if the parent or parents are what we call in Norway “lettere psykisk utviklingshemmet” – mentally retarded to a certain degree – the mother and parents is given a chance at a training place to show whether they are able to handle the daily care for the child or not – an assessment done in the present to prevent severe lack and damage in the future.”

    The majority of the CPS people appear to be cognitively challenged, some of them even mentally retarded to a high degree (complete idiots), and should not be allowed to make decisions about other people’s family life and children.

  12. Funny using the film “I am Sam” as an argument in favour of social workers, foster care, and judges who condemn children to foster care? The film is an excellent portrayal of the opposite! And it ends with the girl going back to her father: because that was the only place where she was happy.
    The social workers in the film faded out of the picture, but the lawyer, her son, even the couple who had been foster ‘parents’ for a while, all cooperated and made helpful friends for the handicapped father and his daughter.

Share your thoughts...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s