Dr. Langewisch

A child protection proceeding under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act involving a child born with neonatal abstinence syndrome due to in-utero drug exposure.

The child was apprehended at birth and remained in Society care.

The mother sought return of the child subject to supervision, while the biological father (identified through DNA testing) supported the mother's position.

The Society sought Crown wardship for purposes of adoption.

The court found the child in need of protection due to risk of emotional harm from parental conflict, unresolved maternal trauma and anger management issues, ongoing health concerns, and past substance abuse.

The court ordered Crown wardship without access, finding this was in the child's best interests despite the mother's improvements and demonstrated parenting capacity during supervised access.

The applicant society brought a motion for temporary care and custody of two children, who were apprehended due to severe neglect, malnutrition, and dental decay.

The parents sought the return of the children under a supervision order with the assistance of extended family.

The court found that the children were likely to suffer physical harm in the parents' care due to the mother's cognitive limitations and the parents' failure to recognize the severity of the children's medical and developmental needs.

The court ordered that the children remain in the temporary care of the society, subject to supervised access, pending a parenting capacity assessment.

The applicant Children's Aid Society sought to maintain temporary care and custody of two young children apprehended on December 19, 2012, due to serious neglect concerns.

The children were found to be severely malnourished and suffering from developmental delays and medical neglect.

The respondent parents sought return of the children, proposing supervision by extended family members.

The court found that the children were at imminent risk of physical harm due to neglect of basic needs, including nutrition, medical care, and developmental stimulation.

The court determined that a temporary supervision order would be inadequate to protect the children given the mother's significant cognitive limitations and the parents' failure to recognize the seriousness of the protection concerns.

The court ordered the children to remain in the Society's care pending completion of a parenting capacity assessment.