Alexandra Barthos

The applicants sought a review of the respondent children's aid society's decision to refuse their application to adopt a two-year-old child who had been in their foster care.

The society had removed the child and refused the adoption after the child suffered an unexplained elbow fracture while in the applicants' care, relying on the 'unexplained injury principle'.

The Child and Family Services Review Board rescinded the society's decision, finding that the unexplained injury principle was distinguishable because the injury was less severe than in precedent cases, there was evidence of potential third-party intervention by the child's siblings, and the society had no other concerns with the applicants' care.

The Board concluded it was in the child's best interests to proceed with the adoption application given the strong sibling bonds and the applicants' ability to meet the child's needs.

The applicant child applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board to review her emergency admission to a secure treatment unit.

The child conceded she had a mental disorder but disputed that the remaining statutory criteria for admission were met.

The Board heard evidence from the child's mother and a staff psychiatrist regarding the child's escalating self-harm, involvement in an online exploitation group, and the failure of less restrictive community treatments.

The Board found that the child's mental disorder caused a substantial threat of serious bodily harm, that the secure treatment program would be effective, and that no less restrictive method was appropriate.

The application for release was denied.

The applicant filed an application with the Child and Family Services Review Board.

During a mediation process following a pre-hearing, the applicant left and subsequently failed to respond to the Board's communications.

The Board directed the applicant to contact them by a specified date or risk dismissal.

Having received no further communication, the Board found the application abandoned and dismissed it.

The applicants sought a review of the Children's Aid Society's decision to remove a four-year-old child placed with them for adoption.

The Society's decision was based on allegations of sexual abuse made by a former foster child against one of the applicants.

The Child and Family Services Review Board found that the Society's verification of the abuse allegations was flawed and unreliable.

Considering the child's secure attachment to the applicants and the significant disruption removal would cause, the Board concluded it was in the child's best interests to remain with the applicants.

The Society's decision was rescinded, and the adoption was directed to proceed.

The applicant filed an application with the Child and Family Services Review Board alleging that the respondent children's aid society failed to properly process her complaint.

The respondent had sent a registered letter to schedule an Internal Complaints Review Panel and attempted to call the applicant, but the letter went unclaimed and the calls were unanswered.

The Board found that the respondent complied with all statutory timeframes and procedural requirements under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act and its regulations.

The application was dismissed.