3 total
The court found five children in need of protection due to chronic neglect and parental incapacity, ordering Crown wardship and kinship placements.
Application by Chatham-Kent Children's Services regarding five children in need of protection.
The court found that the children were in need of protection due to chronic neglect, physical abuse, parental cognitive limitations, and exposure to domestic conflict.
The mother and father of the two youngest children proposed returning all five children to their care in Quebec, but the court rejected this plan as inadequate and unsafe.
The court ordered that the three oldest children be placed in kinship care or as Crown wards with specified access arrangements, and that the two youngest children be made Crown wards with no parental access to facilitate adoption.
The court made an older sibling a Crown ward with supervised access but declined to order ongoing supervision for the younger sibling.
A child protection application concerning two children, S. and J., brought by Chatham-Kent Children's Services.
The Society alleged that the children were in need of protection due to physical and emotional abuse, inappropriate discipline, and inadequate care by their mother and stepfather.
The trial addressed grounds for protection, supervision of access, and whether ongoing protection orders were necessary.
The court found that S. was in need of protection and made her a Crown ward with supervised access to her mother.
The court found that J. was in need of protection in 2007-2008 but that no ongoing protection order was warranted, and he remained in his mother's care without supervision.
Older child made Crown ward due to emotional abuse; no ongoing protection order for younger child.
The applicant children's aid society sought child protection orders for two children.
The older child, who had complex behavioural needs and diagnoses of ADHD and depression, experienced significant conflict and emotional abuse from her stepfather, leading to suicidal ideation.
The court found her in need of protection and made her a Crown ward with access to the mother at the society's discretion.
The younger child had historically been subjected to inappropriate discipline, including being locked in his room, but was currently thriving.
The court found the younger child was historically in need of protection but declined to make an ongoing supervision order, allowing him to remain in the mother's care without conditions.