Gabrielle Pop-Lazic

The applicant applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board to review a children's aid society's refusal of her application to adopt a child.

Prior to the hearing, the society rescinded its refusal and approved the adoption plan.

The applicant requested that the Board remain involved to case manage the adoption process to prevent further delays.

The Board determined it lacked jurisdiction to case manage the adoption once the refusal was rescinded, as its authority under section 192(11) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 is limited to confirming or rescinding a society's refusal.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant sought a review of the children's aid society's decision to refuse his application to adopt his 17-month-old niece, who had been diagnosed with Global Developmental Delay.

The society refused the application based on concerns regarding the applicant's commitment, parenting skills, executive functioning, and financial stability, noting he had missed over half of his scheduled access visits and failed to complete mandatory training.

The tribunal confirmed the society's refusal, finding that the applicant had not demonstrated the requisite parenting skills or commitment to meet the child's physical, mental, and emotional needs, and that further delaying the child's permanent placement was not in her best interests.

The applicant foster parent sought a review of the proposed removal of a First Nations child from her home under section 109(8) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017.

The respondent agency raised a preliminary issue regarding jurisdiction, arguing the child was in customary care, not extended society care.

The Child and Family Services Review Board found that because the child was placed pursuant to a customary care agreement and had never been the subject of a child protection application, section 109 did not apply.

The application was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The applicants, who had fostered the child since she was 17 days old, applied to the Child and Family Services Review Board for a review of the Society's refusal of their application to adopt the child.

The Society had refused the application in favour of a permanency plan with the child's extended family members.

The Board considered the best interests of the child, including her special needs, her strong attachment to the applicants, and her Indigenous heritage.

The Board found that disrupting the child's primary attachment to the applicants would not be in her best interests, rescinded the Society's refusal, and directed the Society to place the child with the applicants for adoption.

The applicant brought a complaint against the Children's Aid Society of Toronto under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, alleging the Society failed to hear her concerns, provide culturally appropriate services, and give reasons for its decisions regarding an investigation into sexual abuse allegations involving her child.

The Board found that the Society had met its statutory obligations to communicate with the applicant, explain its joint investigation process with the police, and provide written reasons for its decisions, including the denial of a file transfer to Native Child and Family Services.

The application was dismissed.