Rupinder Hans

The applicant requested that the Child and Family Services Review Board waive a confidentiality order to allow her to share two previous CFSRB decisions with the Office of the Ombudsman of Ontario for the purpose of an active review.

The respondent took no position on the request.

The adjudicator granted the request, finding that the Ombudsman required the decisions to determine if the issues had already been resolved, and ordered that the decisions be shared solely for the Ombudsman's investigation with no further dissemination permitted.

The applicant foster parent sought a review of the respondent Children's Aid Society's decision to remove a 32-month-old child from her care following a domestic dispute between the applicant and her former partner.

The Child and Family Services Review Board found that the respondent failed to provide the statutorily required notice of removal and improperly removed the child without a local director's opinion of risk.

The Board rejected the respondent's argument that it lacked jurisdiction to order the child returned to a closed Outside Paid Resource foster home.

Applying the best interests of the child test, the Board concluded that the child's physical, mental, and emotional needs, as well as the importance of continuity of care and the child's strong attachment to the applicant, favoured returning the child to the applicant's care.

The removal decision was rescinded.

The respondent child and family services agency sought a variance of the CFSRB's confidentiality rules to permit the use of specific documents from an active CFSRB proceeding in responding to two complaints before the Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers (OCSWSSW).

The applicant opposed the request.

The CFSRB granted the request, finding that the OCSWSSW required the documents to determine whether the complaints before it were frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

The variance was limited to specific pleadings and reports, with an order that the names of any children be redacted.

The respondent requested a waiver of the CFSRB's confidentiality order to use documents from a closed CFSRB file in responding to two complaints before the Ontario College of Social Workers and Social Service Workers (OCSWSSW).

The applicant opposed the request.

The CFSRB granted the request, finding that the OCSWSSW needed to review the materials to determine if the complaints were frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process.

The variance was limited to specific documents, with the names of any children redacted.

The applicant requested that the Child and Family Services Review Board waive a confidentiality order from a previous decision to allow him to use the decision in a family court proceeding and share it with his family lawyer.

The Board denied the request to use the decision in family court, finding it irrelevant to the best interests of the child determination.

However, the Board granted the request to share the decision with the applicant's family lawyer, subject to the lawyer being bound by the confidentiality provisions.

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

The respondent facility argued that the child's complex mental health issues, history of suicidal ideation, and pattern of evading the facility placed her at risk of serious bodily harm.

The Board found that the criteria for emergency admission under subsection 171(2) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act were not met, as the evidence did not establish that the child posed a risk of serious bodily harm to herself or others as a result of her mental disorder at the time of admission.

The Board ordered the child's release.