Denyse Diaz

The applicant applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board for a review of his complaint against the Windsor-Essex Children's Aid Society.

He alleged that the Society refused to proceed with his complaint and failed to provide reasons for wanting to meet with his family regarding a report of inappropriate physical discipline.

The Board dismissed the application, finding that the Society had made several efforts to contact the applicant to address his complaint and had adequately explained its reasons for requesting a meeting in subsequent correspondence.

The applicant appealed the respondent school board's decision to expel his son for allegedly threatening two students with a knife while walking home from school.

The Child and Family Services Review Board found that the incident occurred approximately half a mile from the school and not during a school-related activity.

As the Education Act required the infraction to occur at school or during a school-related activity for a mandatory expulsion, the school board lacked the authority to expel the student.

The expulsion was overturned and ordered expunged from the student's record.

The applicant, a 14-year-old child, applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board for release from a secure treatment program at Youthdale Treatment Centres.

The child argued that the criteria for emergency admission under subsection 124(2) of the Child and Family Services Act were not met.

The Board found that the evidence did not support a conclusion that the child had a mental disorder as defined in the Act, noting that neither the hospital nor the foster home took extra precautions following a reported suicide attempt.

The Board unanimously ordered the child's release from the secure treatment program.

The applicants filed a complaint with the Child and Family Services Review Board against the children's aid society regarding the apprehension and care of their children.

The society brought a preliminary motion arguing the Board lacked jurisdiction over clinical decisions and matters already decided by the court.

The Board found it had jurisdiction over complaints relating to the society's failure to listen to the applicants and failure to respond to written complaints.

On the merits, the Board held that the society failed to provide the applicants an opportunity to be heard by not using an interpreter, and failed to process their written complaints.

The Board ordered the society to conduct an internal complaints review procedure.

The applicant father filed a complaint against the Children's Aid Society regarding its refusal to allow him access to his children, its failure to interview him, and inaccurate information in its files, following the withdrawal of sexual assault charges against him.

The Society brought a preliminary motion arguing the Board lacked jurisdiction because the matters were subject to a separate Director's hearing regarding the Child Abuse Register.

The Board dismissed the jurisdictional motion, finding the complaints related to the Society's files and processes, not the Register itself.

On the merits, the Board found the Society breached the applicant's right to be heard by failing to interview him for its risk assessment, and ordered the Society to conduct an internal review of the file inaccuracies and provide the applicant an interview and written reasons for its decisions.