David Sider

The Children's Aid Society of the Region of Peel brought a motion for summary judgment seeking statutory findings that three children were in need of protection under the Child and Family Services Act and requesting their placement with their father.

The mother opposed the motion, seeking the return of two of the three children to her care.

The court found that the children had suffered physical harm and neglect at the hands of the mother, and that there was a risk of further harm.

The court made statutory findings under multiple subclauses of section 37(2) of the Act and ordered the children placed in the sole care of their father, with the mother receiving supervised access twice monthly at a community access center.

The Office of the Children's Lawyer brought a motion seeking an order that the father undergo a Sexual Offence Specific Assessment.

The child had been apprehended in 2012 following allegations of sexual abuse by the father.

Although the father initially agreed to phallometric testing, he had not completed any assessment despite requests since 2012.

The Society's plan of care was to return the child to the parents' care without requiring the assessment.

The court found that the assessment was necessary to determine whether the father could be a primary caregiver and to assess the risk of sexual harm to the vulnerable child.

The motion was granted.

The Children's Aid Society of the Region of Peel brought a secure treatment application seeking to commit an 11-year-old child with a dual diagnosis of Oppositional Defiant Disorder and Child Onset-Conduct Disorder to the secure treatment program at Syl Apps Youth Centre.

The child had stabbed an older brother in the chest, causing a collapsed lung, and subsequently assaulted staff and a parent while hospitalized.

The court found that all statutory criteria under section 117 of the Child and Family Services Act were satisfied, including the presence of a mental disorder, serious bodily harm caused within the preceding 45 days, additional incidents of serious bodily harm, the effectiveness of the secure treatment program, availability of appropriate treatment, and the absence of less restrictive alternatives.

The court granted the application for a 180-day commitment.