Gilead Kay

This is a status review application under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act concerning a child apprehended at birth due to parental substance abuse and domestic violence.

The mother sought to have the child returned to her care under Society supervision, while the Society sought an order of Crown wardship with a view to adoption by the child's long-term foster parents.

The court found that while the mother had made significant progress in addressing her addiction and mental health issues, the durability of her plan remained uncertain due to limited personal supports and a history of relapse.

The court ordered Crown wardship, finding that the child's best interests required permanency and stability.

Access to the mother was ordered at the Society's discretion with a minimum of once per month.

Access to the father was denied due to inconsistent contact and failure to demonstrate a beneficial and meaningful relationship with the child.

Two children who were Crown wards brought motions for temporary openness orders to maintain contact with their biological mother following their placement for adoption with their maternal grandmother and her partner.

The mother also brought applications for openness orders.

The court dismissed the children's motions for temporary openness orders, finding that while the children desired contact with their mother, such contact was not in their best interests given the mother's demonstrated inability to support the adoption placement, her undermining behaviour toward the adoptive family, and the destabilizing effect visits had on the children's emotional well-being and school behaviour.

The court emphasized that openness orders must prioritize the security and stability of the child in the adoptive home.

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto brought a summary judgment motion seeking a final order of crown wardship without access for the purposes of adoption of a child born in 2013 to parents with significant histories of drug addiction.

The parents opposed the motion, arguing there was a genuine issue requiring a trial.

The court found that while the parents had struggled with addiction and the mother had only recently made progress in treatment and recovery, the question of whether the mother had genuinely turned the corner on her addiction was a material fact requiring further evidence.

The court declined to grant summary judgment and instead ordered a mini-trial under the amended Rule 16 to determine whether there was a genuine issue requiring a full trial.