CB and KO v. Kawartha-Haliburton Children’s Aid Society, 2025 CFSRB 3

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

CB and KO Applicants

-and-

Kawartha-Haliburton Children’s Aid Society Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Caroline Sand Date: January 10, 2025 Citation: 2025 CFSRB 3 Indexed As: CB and KO v Kawartha-Haliburton Children’s Aid Society (CYFSA s.192)

OVERVIEW

1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) pursuant to section 192 of the Child, Youth, and Family Services Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c.14 Sched. 1 (the “Act”).

ISSUE

2Is the Application eligible for review by the CFSRB?

RESULT

3The Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB and must be dismissed.

ANALYSIS

4The Applicants allege that they applied to adopt the child SH (the “Child”), with whom they have a close bond. The Applicants submit that they were progressing in the Respondent’s adoption process, with plans to have the child stay with them overnight and over the winter holiday.

5The Applicants further allege that they learned that the adoption would not proceed in a phone conversation with the Respondent on December 27, 2024.

6The Application was filed with the CFSRB on January 2, 2025.

Notice Requirements

7When a person receives written notice under section 192 that a children’s aid society has decided to refuse their application to adopt a particular child, they may apply within 10 days to the CFSRB for review of that decision.

Case Management Videoconference (“CMVC”)

8It was unclear from the Application whether the Applicants had received written notice of a refusal of their application to adopt the Child. As such, a CMVC was scheduled on January 9, 2025 for the CFSRB to obtain more details from the parties and determine whether the Application was eligible to be reviewed by the CFSRB.

9At the CMVC, the Applicants explained that they did not receive a refusal of their application to adopt in writing, but that the Respondent was clear on the telephone that it was no longer considering the Applicants for the adoption of the Child. The Applicants described that the language used by the Respondent on the telephone was not ambiguous, and that the Respondent said things such as the Applicants were “no longer suitable”, and they were “no longer interested” in placing the Child with them. The Applicants explained that this conversation took place after the Applicants received an emotional telephone call from the Child, who had allegedly been told by the Respondent that an adoption with the Applicants was no longer being considered. The Applicants were concerned that the Respondent communicated to the Child that the Applicants did not want to adopt her.

10The Respondent submitted that it is not directing the Applicants’ adoption application and assessment, which is with Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services (“Simcoe Muskoka”), the region where the family resides. The Respondent explained that the Child resides in the Kawartha Haliburton region, but that the adoption application process is in the control of Simcoe Muskoka.

11The Respondent advised that there was a pause in the Structured Analysis Family Evaluation (“SAFE”) assessment underway with Simcoe Muskoka, as a child protection investigation into one of the Applicants was initiated. The Respondent submitted that it meant to communicate to the Applicants that it would not wait for the investigation and assessment to be completed, as it needed to pursue permanency for the Child without delay. The Respondent further explained that its message to the Applicants was intended to be that it was pausing consideration of the Applicants’ adoption plan until the Applicants were approved by Simcoe Muskoka as prospective adoptive parents.

12Importantly, the Respondent submitted clearly that it did not refuse the Applicants’ application to adopt the Child. The Respondent submitted that the Application to the CFSRB is premature, under the circumstances, and that if and when the Applicants are approved for adoption, the Respondent will consider them, if no permanency plan has been found for the Child in the meantime.

13This was not the Applicants’ understanding following the telephone conversation with a Respondent worker on December 27, 2024. The Respondent has not filed documents and was not required to do so prior to the CFSRB’s eligibility determination. I informed the Respondent that it would be helpful for the CFSRB to see the Respondent’s notes from the telephone call of December 27, 2024. There is clearly a discrepancy between what the Applicants understood from the call, and what the Respondent submitted was intended to be communicated.

Conclusion

14The Respondent stated clearly that the Applicants’ application for adoption has not been refused. The CFSRB’s Form 3 is an “Application for Review of an Adoption Refusal,” pursuant to section 192 of the Act. Following the CMVC, I find that the Applicants’ application to adopt the Child has not been refused, and accordingly, I find that the Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB at this time.

15The Applicants did not have the information presented at the CMVC at the time they filed their Application. While I find the Application not eligible for review, this does not preclude the Applicants from filing a new Application in the future.

16I also note that the Child did not have the benefit of the Respondent’s clarifying communication at the CMVC. I would expect that the Respondent will provide similar information to the Child, given that the Child’s views and wishes are to be taken into consideration in accordance with her age and maturity when making decisions in her best interests.

ORDER

17The Application is dismissed.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

18Pursuant 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.