Cathy Legault

The applicant children's aid society sought Crown wardship of a five-year-old child who had been apprehended due to severe developmental delays and the parents' refusal to seek or accept medical assistance.

The parents opposed the application, seeking the child's return without conditions, and demonstrated a pattern of hostility and non-compliance with child protection workers and medical professionals.

The court found the child in need of protection under the Child and Family Services Act, concluding that the parents failed to provide necessary treatment to alleviate the child's emotional harm and developmental delays.

Crown wardship was ordered with no access granted to the parents, as they failed to prove that access would be meaningful, beneficial, and not impair future adoption opportunities.

In a child protection status review proceeding under the Child and Family Services Act, the respondent mother brought a motion seeking temporary care and custody of two children pending trial, or alternatively expanded unsupervised access.

One child had been apprehended and placed in foster care, while the other was residing with the father under a supervision order.

The court considered whether the apprehended child should be returned to the mother pursuant to s. 51(2) of the Act and whether a change in the existing supervision arrangement was warranted under s. 64(8).

The court found credible evidence suggesting a risk of harm arising from the mother's lifestyle choices, including concerns regarding drug use, exposure to prohibited contact, and instability.

The motion was dismissed and the existing placement arrangements remained in place pending trial.