Nancy J. Thompson

An early status review application by the Children's Aid Society of Toronto seeking crown wardship without access for three children exposed to significant domestic violence.

The mother sought return of the children to her care or, alternatively, an extension of time in care.

The court found that while the children remain in need of protection, the society failed to provide timely and adequate services to the family.

Despite the children's complex needs and the mother's past difficulties, the court granted a six-month extension of society wardship to allow continued progress in counselling and therapeutic interventions, finding that crown wardship was not yet warranted given the recent improvements and the realistic possibility of eventual reunification.

The respondent parents brought motions pursuant to subrule 33(1) of the Family Law Rules to extend timelines for filing Answers/Plans of Care regarding two children in child protection proceedings.

The society opposed the motions and sought to note the parents in default.

The court found that both children were in need of protection based on the parents' significant mental health issues, chronic substance abuse, domestic conflict, and neglect.

The court granted a limited extension for the parents to file Answers/Plans of Care on disposition and access issues only, narrowing the scope of future proceedings.

The court found that while the parents had recently taken steps to address risk concerns, the case would proceed to trial with findings of fact already established.

The Catholic Children's Aid Society of Toronto sought Crown wardship for adoption of two children (ages 7 and 5) who had been in continuous care since June 2010.

The mother sought return of the children under a supervision order, while the father sought a supervision order with the children in his care.

The court found the children to be in need of protection based on the mother's mental health issues, inability to maintain a safe home, self-centered parenting, poor emotional regulation, and history of domestic violence exposure.

The mother's plan was rejected due to her lack of insight into her personality disorder, her toxic relationship with the society, and her inability to consistently prioritize the children's needs.

The father's plan was abandoned when his family withdrew their support.

The court ordered both children to be made Crown wards for the purpose of adoption, with no access granted to the mother.

This is an evidentiary ruling in a child protection trial concerning the admissibility of a Child and Family Services Review Board decision.

The applicant society sought to exclude a Board decision that upheld the mother's complaints regarding the society's failure to comply with statutory obligations.

The court ruled that the Board's decision was admissible both as a public document and under the principled exception to the hearsay rule based on necessity and reliability.

The decision addresses the relevance of the Board's findings to the court's consideration of whether the society provided appropriate services and gave the parent a reasonable opportunity to parent.

This is a child protection trial under the Child and Family Services Act involving an amended protection application brought by the Children's Aid Society of Toronto regarding a child (A.L.) born in 2010.

The child was apprehended on December 17, 2010, due to the mother's mental health crisis, suicidal ideation, domestic conflict within the parental relationship, and concerns about parental capacity.

The Society sought a Crown wardship order with no access to facilitate adoption.

The parents opposed the application and sought the child's return to their care.

The court found the child was in need of protection but determined that return to the parents with a supervision order was in the child's best interests, rejecting the Society's adoption plan.

The court applied section 70(4) of the CFSA to extend the time for Society wardship to facilitate a gradual transition home over four months.

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto brought a motion for summary judgment seeking an order to make the child C.S. a Crown ward and place her in the care and custody of the Society.

The respondent mother opposed the motion and sought either dismissal or, alternatively, a short-term Society wardship with transition to her care.

The court found no genuine issue requiring trial and granted the summary judgment motion, making C.S. a Crown ward.

The decision was based on the mother's intellectual disability, her inability to meet the child's needs consistently, her ongoing relationship with an abusive partner despite court orders prohibiting contact, the child's special needs including global developmental delay and possible fetal alcohol spectrum disorder, and the failure of the parents to demonstrate meaningful change or capacity to parent safely.

The Children's Aid Society of Toronto brought a motion for summary judgment seeking statutory findings that four children were in need of protection and dispositional orders placing two children with their maternal grandparents and two children with their paternal grandmother, subject to Society supervision and specified access conditions.

The mother opposed the motion and sought to have all children returned to her care.

The court granted the summary judgment motion, finding that the mother had failed to demonstrate a genuine issue for trial.

The court found that the mother had not successfully addressed her lifestyle and parenting challenges, remained incapable of forming therapeutic relationships with professionals, and was unable to prioritize the children's needs over her own.

The court made custody orders under section 57.1 of the Child and Family Services Act placing the children with their grandparents, with access to the parents as agreed by the custodians or as specified by the court.