JG and CG v North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services, 2023 CFSRB 24

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

JG and CG Applicants

-and-

North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Daniel McSweeney Date: March 15, 2023 Citation: 2023 CFSRB 24 Indexed As: JG and CG v North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services (CYFSA s.120)

Introduction

1This is a Complaint filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) under section 120 (4) 4 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).

2This decision explains why the Complaint is not eligible for review by the CFSRB.

BACKGROUND

3The Applicants are the grandparents of two grandsons (the “Children”). The Applicants allege that the Respondent’s staff have not heard their concerns regarding the Children’s fears associated with access visits with their mother, and their fears of potentially being returned to her custody. The Applicants allege that the Children are adversely affected by access visits, and one of the Children has indicated that he would rather die than return to live with his mother. The Applicants are also concerned with Respondent staff insisting that the Children attend access visits.

THE LAW

4Section 120(4) of the Act states:

The following matters may be reviewed by the Board under this section:

1. Allegations that the society has refused to proceed with a complaint made by the complainant under section 119(1) as required under subsection 119(2).

2. Allegations that the society has failed to respond to the complainant’s complaint within the timeframe required by regulation.

3. Allegations that the society has failed to comply with the complaint review procedure or with any other procedural requirements under this Act relating to the review of complaints.

4. Allegations that the society has failed to comply with section 15(2).

5. Allegations that the society has failed to provide the complainant with reasons for a decision that affects the complainant’s interests.

5Section 15(2) of the Act ensures that:

“children and young persons and their parents have an opportunity to be heard and represented when decisions affecting their interests are made and to be heard when they have concerns about the services they are receiving.”

6H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services (CFSA s. 68), 2012 CFSRB 4 (para. 51) examines the issue of who is in receipt of services.

Looking at the statute, the Society’s obligation to provide reasons in section 68.1 (4) 5 is not confined to “parents”. If that were the case, the obligation would be associated with section 2(2) (a) of the Act, like the right to be heard. The right to reasons for decisions that affect one’s interests is broad and recognizes that there may be persons other than parents who are involved with children under the Act and whose lives may be impacted by Society decisions. For example, the Board has held that foster parents or teachers who are the subject of an investigation by a society are receiving a service and are entitled to reasons relating to the decisions made in the investigation. The Board has also held that grandparents who have sought access to their grandchildren from a society that controls access have a right to reasons.

ANALYSIS

7The Applicants are the grandparents to the Children. The Applicants expressed concern for the health and safety of the Children during access visits as well as concerns with the possible effect of returning the Children to the custody of their mother.

8The right to be heard in the Act is limited to “children and young persons and their parents”. The definition of “parent” in the Act does not include foster parents or grandparents. As such, section 15(2) of the Act does not apply to the Applicants.

9I considered the application of H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services to this Complaint. I have not been provided with any evidence that the Applicants have received or are currently receiving any services or assistance related to access to their grandchildren from North East Ontario Family and Children’s Services.

10As such, I find that the Applicants are not in receipt of services from North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services. Therefore, the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to review the Application under sections 120 (4) 4 and 5 of the Act.

11For these reasons, the CFSRB lacks jurisdiction to review the Complaint.

ORDER

12The Application is dismissed.

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.