HS v. Jewish Family and Child Service, 2021 CFSRB 4

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

HS

Applicant

-and-

Jewish Family and Child Service

Respondents

DECISION

Adjudicator: Silvia Novak
Date: January 26, 2021 Citation: 2021 CFSRB 4 Indexed As: HS v Jewish Family and Child Service (CYFSA s.120)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

HS, Applicant

Self-represented

Jewish Family and Child Service, Respondent

Arthi Srivarapathy, Counsel

Introduction

1This is an Application filed under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c.14, Sched.1, (the “Act”).

2The Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) found the Application eligible under subsections 120(4)4 and 120(4)5 of the Act

the law

3Section 120(8)(a) of the Act states:

The Board shall not conduct a review of a complaint under this section if the subject of the complaint,

(a) is an issue that has been decided by the court or is before the court.

background

4The Applicant, his 12-year-old child and the child’s mother have been involved with Jewish Family and Child Service since the child’s infancy.

5In his application, the Applicant outlines his concerns about how the Society has worked with the family, including their decisions related to the child’s mother, the Society’s view of his alcohol use and how access to his daughter was managed since the COVID 19 pandemic.

6In his Application to the Board, the Applicant also indicated his concern has been dealt with in Court and/or is currently before the Court.

7The Respondent submits the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to review the application as the issues have been and continue to be before the Court. In its submission, the Respondent provided a number of Court documents spanning between 2017 to as recently as January 2021. These documents speak to the issues raised by the Applicant including the steps taken by the Society, both parents’ individual functioning, the conflict between the parents, the custody of the child, as well as the child’s access to her father during the COVID 19 pandemic. The documents also indicate the Applicant has been and continues to be represented by counsel.

8The Applicant was also invited to make submissions on the s.120(8)(a) jurisdictional issue. In his correspondence of December 30th, 2020, the Applicant stated the Court has never been provided with assessments of the mother’s mental health, or of the Society and/or it’s staff’s actions. He also expressed a desire to have mediation and/or a different agency involved.

analysis

9The Applicant initially indicated in his application that his concern was and or is before the Court. He later submitted that the Court has not been provided a report about the Society’s involvement and/or the mother’s functioning.

10The Respondent provided a number of Court documents which outline the Society’s actions as well as the evidence they gathered related to each parent’s functioning. Those documents included Court Orders which addressed how the Society would work with each parent, as well as the custody of the child and/or her access to each parent.

11After reviewing all of the evidence before me, I find the issues have been decided by the court and/or are before the Court and therefore are ineligible for review by this Board. The Applicant can of course raise his concerns and/or proposed resolutions in the ongoing Court proceeding.

order

12The Applicant’s complaint is dismissed in its entirety.

confidentiality order

13Pursuant 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.