2 total
Interim relocation to Ottawa denied to maintain child's stability; primary residence ordered with mother.
The respondent father brought a motion for interim primary residence of the parties' child, seeking to relocate the child to Ottawa.
The applicant mother brought a cross-motion for interim primary residence and child support.
The court found that the status quo was that the child resided primarily with the mother.
The court held that a temporary order should not disrupt the status quo without compelling reasons, and that the father's proposed move to Ottawa was untested and would be a significant disruption to the child.
The court ordered that the child reside primarily with the mother, with the father having access three weekends per month and bi-weekly evenings.
The father was ordered to pay child support.
The father was awarded costs of $7,500 as he was the successful party based on his offer to settle.
Crown wardship granted where severe parenting risks could not be managed by supports.
In a child protection trial concerning a newborn apprehended at birth, the court found the child in need of protection based on likely physical and emotional harm arising from the respondents’ inability to safely and consistently meet the child’s needs.
The court placed significant weight on extensive worker observations, corroborated by psychological assessments identifying profound cognitive limitations, poor follow-through, hygiene concerns, smoking-related health risks, and inability to adapt parenting to the child’s developmental needs.
Applying the governing child protection and best interests framework under the Child and Family Services Act, the court held that the risk could not be adequately managed even with outside supports.
Less disruptive alternatives, including supervision, kin placement, and an adjournment for further parenting evidence, were rejected.
Crown wardship without access and with a view to adoption was ordered.
