In a combined child protection and status review trial involving four children, the court found the youngest child in need of protection and concluded that Crown wardship was the least intrusive order consistent with the best interests of all four children.
The evidence established chronic neglect of the home environment, inability to manage the children’s significant behavioural needs, abusive discipline, repeated school lateness, persistent enmeshment of the children in adult conflict, and longstanding unresolved mental health and grief issues affecting parenting capacity.
The court accepted the psychologist’s evidence that the parent’s deficits were deep-rooted and not amenable to change in the foreseeable future, and that supervision could not adequately protect the children.
Access to the parent was denied for the two youngest children, supervised access was preserved for the two eldest children, and inter-sibling access was ordered for all children.
