CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD
W.C.
v.
CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY OF THE COUNTIES OF STORMONT, DUNDAS AND GLENGARRY
REASONS FOR DECISION
Date: September 27, 2012
Citation: 2012 CFSRB 39
Indexed as: W.C. v. Children’s Aid Society of the Counties of Stormont, Dundas and Glengarry (CFSA s.68)
REASONS FOR DECISION
INTRODUCTION
1On July 11, 2012, W.C. (the “Applicant”) filed an application with the Child and Family Services Review Board (the “Board”) against the Children’s Aid Society of the Counties of Stormont, Dundas & Glengarry (the “Society”) pursuant to section 68.1 of the Child and Family Services Act (the “Act”). The application was found to be eligible for review under sections 68.1(4)4 and 68.1(4)5 on July 12, 2012.
2A pre-hearing conference for the application was held on August 3, 2012. The Applicant alleged that the Society had not heard his service concerns or heard him when decisions were made and had not provided him with reasons for decisions that affected his interests regarding two matters:
- The health and safety concerns related to his child while in foster care over the last four (4) months, including neglect by the foster parents since March 2012.
- The Society’s allegations that the mother was physically abusive to the child on March 27. 2012.
3The Society disagreed with the allegations and felt that it had been compliant with all aspects of section 68.1(4) of the Act.
4The Applicant’s application was scheduled to be heard by the Board at an oral hearing on September 19, 2012. For the reasons that follow the Board dismissed the application on September 19, 2012.
BACKGROUND
5The Applicant is the father of [ ](the “Child”), who is five (5) years old. The child’s mother (the “Mother”) is the permanent partner of the Applicant. The Society apprehended the Child in early February 2011. The Court issued a temporary care and custody order to the Society on February [ ], 2011 and placed the Child in a foster home. The Society received an interim supervision order from the Court on June [ ], 2011. The Child continues to reside in a foster home.
6The Board received no documents nor did it hear any testimony at the hearing on September 19, 2012. Further details regarding the background activities that led to the application are therefore omitted.
ANALYSIS
7The hearing opened with the Board providing an over-view explanation of the reasons for the hearing. The Board asked the Applicant if he was calling any witnesses to testify. He replied in the negative. The Applicant also informed the Board that he was not testifying himself nor had he brought any documents to enter as evidence to support his allegations against the Society.
8The Board attempted to encourage him to proceed. The Board read into the record his application, the ruling on eligibility and the two issues he agreed were the basis of his complaint as outlined in the Pre-hearing report of August 14, 2012. The Board emphasized that these were his complaints and the hearing was his opportunity to have the Board hear those complaints.
9Following this explanation the Board re-iterated its question vis-à-vis proceeding with the hearing. The Applicant consulted briefly with the Mother. He stated to the Board: “No, not at this time”. He and the mother immediately vacated the premises.
10The Board encouraged the Applicant to proceed with the hearing. Twice the Applicant clearly indicated his intentions not to proceed; at the outset of the hearing and after the Board’s detailed efforts to explain the purpose of the proceeding and to encourage him to participate in it. After the Applicant left the premises, the Board concluded that the Applicant had chosen to abandon his application. The Board dismissed the application.
CONCLUSION
11The Board dismisses the application. The file is now closed.
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
12The hearing was conducted in private and was not open to the public. Parties and their representatives must not use, share or disclose any documents or information provided or used in this application with anyone including the media or on-line. Any documents or information shared by the parties must be used only for the purpose of the hearing of this application by the Board.
GAIL GONDA
Gail Gonda Presiding Member
JOHN SPEKKENS
John Spekkens Panel Member
JOHN GATES
John Gates Panel Member
Dated at Toronto, Ontario on this 27th day of September, 2012.