TS v Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services, 2018 CFSRB 65

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

TS

Applicant

-and-

Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: John F. Spekkens

Date: December 20, 2018

Citation: 2018 CFSRB 65

Indexed as: TS v Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services

(CYFSA s.120)

APPEARANCES

TS, Applicant

Self-represented

Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services, Respondent

Karen O’Keefe, Counsel

Introduction

1The Applicant and Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services (the “Society”) entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”) during a mediation held on November 2, 2018, providing for a full settlement of all issues raised by the Applicant in her Application dated September 19, 2018 to the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFRSB”).

2The Application focussed on E (the Child), who was born in 2016. The Applicant is a sister on the Child's father's side. The Applicant only learned of the Child’s existence in the summer of 2017. E is currently in the custody of the Society. The Applicant has expressed a strong interest in adopting the Child, and currently has some access visits with her.

3The Applicant has twin siblings, D and L, who are the subjects of an adoption application from their grandmother currently being processed by the Society. The Applicant also is seeking improved access to the twins.

4The signed Agreement contained eight Terms, which are expressed as questions to the Society and which sought reasons and/or explanations from the Society.

5On November 29, 2018 the Society sent the Applicant its Response to the issues raised in the Agreement.

6In an email dated December 3, 2018, the Applicant alleged non-compliance by the Society on three of the eight Terms.

7In accordance with the CFSRB’s procedures when there is an allegation of non-compliance, the CFSRB held a hearing by teleconference on December 17, 2018 to determine whether the Society had complied with the Terms of the Agreement.

8I have reviewed all of the materials filed by both parties as well as additional comments made by the Society during the teleconference. I have determined that the Society has complied with the Terms of the Agreement. The reasons for this decision follow.

ANALYSIS

9I reminded the parties that the hearing was limited to the Terms of the Agreement. No new material would be considered. The discussion focussed only on the three Terms which were alleged to be non-compliant. As well, I reminded the parties of the Society's obligation to provide reasons for its decisions, as mandated by the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (the “Act”).

Term 2: In this Application, the Applicant’s partner is an integral part of the plans dealing with the proposed adoption. The Applicant proposes a plan to adopt the Child E; she believes that their age and physical capacity to respond to the Child E’s special needs, their firm commitment to foster the child’s native heritage, their commitment to partner with the grandmother if the grandmother adopts the twins D and L, and to promote the link between E and D and L; what more would the Society like to see to enhance their application?

10The Response indicated that there was an initial need for the Society to clarify if the application to adopt was from the Applicant as an individual, or whether the application to adopt was a joint application of both the Applicant and her partner. Once that clarification had been made, the Society’s response indicated that there was nothing that would be expected from the Applicant. In discussion, the Society elaborated, and described the province-wide application, known as the SAFE (“Structured Analysis Family Evaluation”) home study process that is used by all children’s aid societies in doing the home study on adoption applicants. The Society also explained that many of the specifics that the applicant wondered about (e.g. reference checks, medical histories, police record checks, etc.) were all included in the SAFE home study process.

11I asked the Applicant whether the discussion on this issue was helpful to understand the scope of the home study process, and she indicated that it was. I find the Society is in compliance with Term 2.

Term 4: What steps can the Society take to expedite the process of getting permanency through adoption for the three young children involved, especially since initial applications were made in August 2017 by the Applicant and in April 2017 or February 2018?

12The Response stated as follows:

The Society has moved forward with a concurrent adoption home study with you and your partner. This would be considered expedited given that home studies are usually completed one at a time. There is nothing further to be done in order to further expedite the process.

13The Response clearly states that, as a result of the issue being raised by the Applicant on November 29, 2018, the Society has expedited the application by starting the Applicant’s homestudy before the other homestudy of the paternal grandmother was completed.

14A number of other issues were raised in the discussion, and were meant to allay anxieties the Applicant may have had on the timeframe in which her application was being dealt with. It was pointed out that no decision on the choice of a prospective adoptive applicant would be made before both home studies are completed, and that there is no “advantage” to the applicant whose home study is completed first. As well, the process appears more complex because the Applicant lives in a different jurisdiction, and the home study will be carried out by the local children’s aid society. A referral and request have been made to the other children’s aid society; the Society will follow up today with the other society, as to when they project being able to commence the Applicant’s home study.

15I asked the Applicant whether the discussion on this issue was helpful to understand the issue of the timing of the home study process, and she indicated that it was. I find the Society is in compliance with Term 4.

Term 7: The Applicant would like to expand her access visits with the Child E:

a) With E: an expansion of visits with the Child E from the current schedule of visits;

b) Between E and the twins D and L: the Applicant would like to explore the possibilities for more access visits among the three younger siblings, and is committed to working with the Society and the grandmother to make this happen for the benefit of all siblings involved.

Would the Society endorse this approach and assist in making this happen?

16Changes have been made to the access schedule as to frequency. This weekend, there was an extended visit with E. Looking forward, there are full week visits planned for the month of January, with full week visits planned every second week. Plans are also underway to include the twins on a more frequent basis. The final schedule for visits over the Christmas season has not yet been finalized.

17The Society is committed to maintaining a schedule of more frequent visits than has occurred in the past. Both parties agreed that medical appointments and winter weather conditions may require some deviation from planned access visits; the commitment, however, remains on the part of the Society for increased visits over what has happened in the past.

18I asked the Applicant whether the discussion on this issue was helpful to reach an agreement on increased access visits, and she indicated that it was. I find that the Society is in compliance with Term 7.

CONCLUSION

19The Society recognizes many of the anxieties of the Applicant around the various aspects of her application to adopt E. The hearing helped in explaining various aspects of the process, and in particular allaying any fears that she and her partner have that any delays in the extensive home study process may work against them in terms of the ultimate Society decision on the adoption of E. In the meantime, before a final decision is made, the Society has committed to increasing the amount of time available to the Applicant for access visits with E and with the Applicant’s other siblings.

20The Society’s explanations and responses to the Applicant’s questions during the teleconference, in addition to the other Terms of the Agreement that were not challenged as to their compliance to the Agreement, have given the Applicant a much better understanding about the process required to evaluate her and her partner’s application to adopt E.

21I find the Society complied with its commitments arising from the Settlement Agreement.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

22Pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure, parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CFSRB documents or decisions, or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application, with anyone including through the media or online. The CFSRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CFSRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CFSRB, as appropriate.