CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD
BETWEEN:
JM
Applicant
-and-
Dnaagdawenmag Binnoojiiyag Child and Family Services
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Daniel McSweeney
Indexed As: JM v Dnaagdawenmag Binnoojiiyag Child and Family 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 Applicant identified 2 children in her Complaint: her step-daughter and a sibling of her step-daughter (the “Children”).
4The Applicant alleged that Respondent staff did not hear her concerns regarding the health, safety, and well-being of the Children while in the care of their mother. The Applicant alleged that the Children were being exposed to neglect and drug use in their environment.
5The Respondent provided a Response to the Complaint in which it argued that the CFSRB should dismiss the Complaint given that the Applicant is neither a parent nor is she a service recipient. The Respondent indicated that the Applicant has not provided evidence of her legal status as a parent to the one Child.
6The Respondent also argued that the Applicant is a referent and, given the provisions in Part X of the Act which covers the collection, use and disclosure of personal information, the Respondent cannot release any information regarding the Respondent’s actions (if any) in relation to the Applicant’s reported concerns.
7On February 29, 2024, pursuant to a Case Management Direction, the Applicant was directed to provide written submissions on whether she has been or is receiving services from the Respondent, and whether she is a parent as defined by the Act. The Applicant failed to provide submissions by the deadline of March 11, 2024.
THE LAW
8Section 120(4) of the Act states:
The following matters may be reviewed by the Board under this section:
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).
Allegations that the society has failed to respond to the complainant’s complaint within the timeframe required by regulation.
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.
Allegations that the society has failed to comply with section 15(2).
Allegations that the society has failed to provide the complainant with reasons for a decision that affects the complainant’s interests.
9Section 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.”
10H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services (CFSA s. 68), 2012 CFSRB 4 (2012-02-01) (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
11I considered whether the Applicant had the right to be heard pursuant to section 120(4)4 of the Act.
12The right to be heard in the Act is limited to “children and young persons and their parents”. The Applicant indicated in the Complaint that she is the stepmother of one of the Children. The Applicant did not provide any evidence to support that she has legal custody of the Child as defied in the Act. Furthermore, the Applicant has not provided any evidence to indicate that she has any legal status regarding the Child’s sibling.
13In the absence of any evidence and submissions (as she was directed to do in the Case Management Direction), I find that section 15(2) of the Act does not apply to the Applicant as her legal right to act as a parent has not been established.
14I then considered whether the Applicant has been or is currently in receipt of services. I considered the application of H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services to this Complaint: if the Applicant was in receipt of services from the Respondent.
15I have not been provided with any evidence or submissions that the Applicant has received or is currently receiving any services or assistance related to the Children from the Respondent. As such, I find that the Applicant is not in receipt of services from the Respondent. Therefore, she is not entitled to reasons from the Respondent.
16For these reasons, the CFSRB lacks jurisdiction to review the Complaint under sections 120(4) 4 and 5 of the Act.
17I concur with the Respondent that the Applicant is a referent rather than a service recipient. I would like to point the Applicant to paragraph 20 in the Response which recognizes the Applicant’s concerns and the fact that she reported the child protection concerns appropriately. This confirms that the Applicant’s concerns as a referent were heard.
DECISION
18The Application is dismissed.
confidentiality order
19Pursuant 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.
Dated at Toronto, March 22, 2023.
Daniel McSweeney
Daniel McSweeney
Member