Notice of Publication Ban

In the matter of College of Early Childhood Educators and Eddiezel Obedoza Lazaro, the Discipline Committee ordered that no person shall publish or broadcast the identity of, or any information that could identify any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in the hearing, or the subject of evidence in the hearing, or under subsection 35.1(3) of the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007.

Discipline Committee of the

College of Early Childhood Educators

In the case of EDDIEZEL OBEDOZA LAZARO, Registration #42708

Panel

Katie Begley, RECE, Chair Peeter Põldre Barbara Brown, RECE

Meeting date:

April 20, 2026

Decision and reasons

Eddiezel Obedoza Lazaro (“the RECE”) and the Prosecutor for the College of Early Childhood Educators participated in a Discipline Resolution Process¹ and agreed on a Proposed Resolution. This Panel of the Discipline Committee reviewed the Proposed Resolution and the reasons why the RECE and the Prosecutor felt it was appropriate.

We adopted the Proposed Resolution. We decided Eddiezel Obedoza Lazaro (“the RECE”) is guilty of professional misconduct, including physical abuse, psychological or emotional abuse of a child, and breaches of the standards of practice. We ordered a reprimand; a 12-month suspension; and terms, conditions or limitations meant to improve the RECE’s practice. We explain our reasons for this decision below.

Discipline Resolution Process

The RECE and the Prosecutor participated in a case management process. A neutral Facilitator held meetings with the RECE and the Prosecutor and shared information about the RECE’s options, the possible outcomes of choosing different options, and the discipline process. The RECE also had access to Duty Counsel during case management.

At the end of the case management process, the Facilitator wrote a report based on the RECE and Prosecutor’s Proposed Resolution. The RECE and the Prosecutor had a chance to comment on the accuracy of the Facilitator’s report, and then the report was given to us to make a decision in the case.

The report said:

The accusations

After a complaint or report is made about an RECE, the College of Early Childhood Educators investigates and its Complaints Committee screens the case based on the results of the investigation.

On August 22, 2025, the Complaints Committee made accusations against the RECE. The RECE is accused of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 33(2) of the Early Childhood Educators Act (the “ECE Act”)² and its Professional Misconduct Regulation³ in that she

• Physically abused a child who was under her professional supervision
• Psychologically or emotionally abused a child who was under her professional supervision
• Failed to maintain the standards of the profession.⁴ In particular, the RECE is accused of:
  • Failing to be knowledgeable about a range of strategies that support ongoing positive interactions with children and families
  • Failing to engage in supportive and respectful interactions with children to ensure they feel a sense of security and belonging
  • Failing to work in partnership with children, families and colleagues to create a safe, healthy and inviting environment that promotes a sense of belonging, well-being and inclusion
  • Failing to know the current legislation, policies and procedures that are relevant to her professional practice and to the care and education of children
  • Failing to model professional values, beliefs and behaviours with children, families and colleagues, and/or she failed to understand that her conduct reflects on her as a professional and on her profession at all times
• Acted or failed to act in a manner that, having regard to the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional
• Acted in a manner that is unbecoming a member

Facts

The RECE and the Prosecutor have agreed about what the facts are in this case.

The RECE has been registered in good standing with the College since April 2013 with no prior discipline history. During the incidents described below, she was employed as an RECE at Maawdoo Maajaamin Child Care Centre (the “Centre”) in Haldimand County, Ontario.

Between June 2022 and April 2023, the RECE was aggressive, forceful and/or demeaning to preschool-aged children she was supervising

• On multiple occasions in June and July 2022, the RECE did not allow children to go to the washroom when they were on the playground. She told them to relieve themselves in their Pull-Ups, which was against the Centre’s policy.
• A few months prior to April 2023, the RECE grabbed and dragged Child 1 by the wrist after they threw toys in the classroom. She did not let go for several minutes, despite Child 1’s crying, screaming and resistance to her hold.
• In March 2023, around nap time, the RECE made physical contact with Child 2’s head and upper arm. They felt pain and cried, and another staff comforted them.
• On April 10, 2023, when Child 3 started crying during nap time, the RECE forcefully grabbed their arm, twisted it behind their back and pulled them off the floor. Child 3 cried for several more minutes because of the RECE’s actions.
• On April 13, 2023 during an outdoor walk, Child 4 was holding another staff’s hand and the RECE forcefully grabbed and pulled their arm for 1 – 2 minutes, despite them crying and repeatedly trying to resist her hold. After the RECE let Child 4 go, they ran to another staff for comfort.

The College is not aware of any marks, physical injuries or long-lasting emotional impact to the children because of these incidents.

The Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation, who operate the Centre, investigated. They concluded that the “accusations appear to be substantiated” and that the RECE used “forceful physical contact of children within her supervision on more than one occasion”.

Child and Family Services of Grand Erie investigated the incidents that happened on April 10, 2023 (with Child 3), and April 13, 2023 (with Child 4). They did not verify “physical harm toward the children” but wrote in a letter to the Centre that the incidents “may not fall in line with the higher-level expectation of an individual providing childcare in a licensed setting or gentle parenting practices.”

The Centre’s Behaviour Guidance and Discipline Policy prohibits staff from “Depriving a child of basic needs including food, drink, shelter, sleep, toilet use, clothing or bedding.” Its Child Care Staff Manual says that if “a classroom staff is unable to accompany a child to the washroom from outdoors the staff will walkie for an available staff to receive the child and assist.”

The RECE’s employment at the Centre was terminated because of the incidents described above.

Findings of guilt

The RECE and the Prosecutor agree that the RECE is guilty of all of the accusations listed above.

The Prosecutor added that the RECE’s aggressive and forceful interactions were physically abusive and that she used physical restraint (a prohibited practice) by continuing to hold Child 1 and Child 4 when they resisted her hold.

The Prosecutor said that the RECE’s conduct was psychological and/or emotional abuse because it had a negative emotional impact on several children.

In addition, the Prosecutor said that the RECE failed to comply with the Code of Ethics and several Standards of Practice. She didn’t follow the Code of Ethics, which requires RECEs to make the well-being, learning and care of children their priority, to value children’s rights, and to create learning environments where all children can experience security and belonging. The Standards of Practice she didn’t follow include providing developmentally appropriate guidance to the children. The RECE used prohibited practices and breached the Centre’s Policies, which shows that she failed to know, understand and abide by legislation, policies and procedures relevant to the profession. She also failed to model professional values and behaviours with children.

Finally, the Prosecutor said that the RECE’s conduct was disgraceful, dishonourably and a serious disregard of her professional obligations. It reflects negatively on her and is unbecoming a member of the profession.

Consequences for the RECE

The RECE and the Prosecutor agree about what consequences would be appropriate to address the RECE’s misconduct. They propose that the Discipline Committee order:

• A verbal reprimand
• Suspension of the RECE’s certificate of registration for at least 12 months
• Terms, conditions and limitations on the RECE’s certificate of registration, including courses and mentorship

A proposed Order based on the Proposed Resolution is attached to this report.

The RECE and the Prosecutor believe these consequences are appropriate for three broad reasons.

First, they believe that the proposed consequences are consistent with goals of remediating the RECE’s practice and discouraging this RECE and other RECEs from acting similarly in the future. They also believe that these consequences will maintain the public’s trust in the regulation of RECEs.

Second, they believe that the proposed consequences take into account the specific facts that mean more and/or less serious consequences are needed to protect children and the public.

The facts they said suggested more consequences were needed included that

• The children were vulnerable due to their young age.
• This was not a single lapse in judgment. It was a pattern of misconduct that took place in summer 2022 and spring 2023.
• The interactions with children included unnecessary power struggles, which escalated to the RECE’s use of violence.
• She caused emotional distress to 4 children. The conduct took place in the learning environment, where other children could have seen it. There is no direct evidence about negative emotional impact to other children, but her conduct could have negatively impacted other children’s sense of security and belonging.
• The RECE degraded the children by not allowing them to use the washroom while outside and insisting they relieve themselves in their Pull-Ups. This went against the Centre’s Behaviour Guidance and Discipline Policy, which prohibited depriving basic needs including toilet use.
• The conduct is serious enough to reflect negatively on the profession of early childhood education. Violence and physically abusive conduct towards children erode the trust parents and families put in RECEs.

The facts they said suggested less consequences were needed included:

• The RECE’s admission of guilt shows remorse and insight and means there does not need to be a contested hearing that takes up time and resources.
• The RECE does not have a history of misconduct.

They also considered that:

• There is no evidence of any physical marks or injuries to the children because of the RECE’s conduct.
• The College is not aware of any long-term emotional impact to the children.

Third, they believe that the proposed consequences are in line with past cases decided by the Discipline Committee. They shared 3 past cases, which are also attached to this report.

The report described the three past cases included in the proposed resolution.⁵ In two of the cases, RECEs engaged in patterns of physically and verbally abusive conduct towards 4 children over 1-2 weeks. In the third case, an RECE engaged in a single incident of aggressive and forceful conduct for several minutes with one child. The final orders in all three cases included similar consequences to those proposed in this case, including suspensions ranging from 10-14 months.

Why we adopted the Proposed Resolution

After participating in a case management process that gave the RECE information about her legal rights and options, as well as access to advice from Duty Counsel, both the RECE and the Prosecutor (acting on behalf of the College) agreed on the Proposed Resolution. The final step of the case management process involves the Facilitator going over the Proposed Resolution with the RECE to make sure they understand it and its consequences. These protections give us confidence that the RECE’s decision to admit guilt and to agree on a proposed order to address her professional misconduct was voluntary and clear and that she understands the consequences of admitting guilt.

The Proposed Resolution describes the facts and why those facts mean the RECE is guilty of all of the accusations of professional misconduct that were made against her. We agree that the facts in the Proposed Resolution mean the RECE is guilty of professional misconduct for the reasons included in the report.

The RECE engaged in various kinds of physical and emotional / psychological abuse involving multiple children over a protracted period. We were struck by the RECE’s denying children the basic need of going to the washroom. She acted as if this was an inconvenience for her. This shows a concerning lack of respect for children’s well-being and complete disregard for children as people. Further, her actions / inactions were developmentally inappropriate, compromising the children’s development regarding toileting. This also contravened the Centre’s policies.

The Proposed Resolution also lists consequences that are proposed to address the professional misconduct and describes why they are appropriate. The Discipline Committee decides what consequences are appropriate based on what will protect children and the public. The consequences for professional misconduct should fit the circumstances, and we believe the proposed consequences will protect children and maintain public confidence in RECEs for the reasons included in the report.

While we acknowledge that we must only consider the conduct of the RECE in this case, we are concerned that multiple opportunities to report this RECE’s conduct were missed by others at the Centre. This created a situation that enabled multiple instances of abuse to occur. We want to send a message to the membership that it is imperative that all staff follow centre policies and hold each other accountable to them.

Our final Order is attached to this decision.

I, Katie Begley, sign this decision and reasons for the decision as Chair of and on behalf of the members of the Discipline panel.

April 20, 2026

Katie Begley, RECE, Chair

Date

Discipline Committee of the

College of Early Childhood Educators

In the case of EDDIEZEL OBEDOZA LAZARO, Registration #42708

Panel:

Katie Begley, RECE, Chair Peeter Põldre Barbara Brown, RECE

ORDER

The College of Early Childhood Educators and Eddiezel Obedoza Lazaro (the “Member”) agree and jointly submit that the Discipline Committee make an Order:

1. Requiring the Member to appear before a Panel of the Discipline Committee to be reprimanded within 60 days from the date of the Order.

2. Directing the Registrar to suspend the Member’s certificate of registration for a period of

   a. 12 months; or

   b. the period of time required to comply with terms, conditions and limitations set out in paragraphs 3(a) to 3(f) below,

   whichever is greater.

   The suspension will take effect from the date of this Order and will run without interruption as long as the College has not otherwise prohibited the Member from practising or suspended the Member for any other reason.

3. Directing the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions and limitations on the Member’s certificate of registration:

   Coursework

   a. Prior to the Member commencing or resuming employment as a Registered Early Childhood Educator (“RECE”) or engaging in the practice of early childhood education, as defined in section 2 of the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, the Member must successfully complete, with a minimum passing grade of 70% (or to the satisfaction of the Director of Professional Regulation (the “Director”) if a grade is not assigned) and at her own expense, the following courses (subject to the Director’s pre-approval):

   i. Building positive and responsive relationships with children; and

   ii. Positive intervention strategies.

   b. The Member must provide the Director with proof of enrollment and successful completion of the courses.

   Mentorship

   c. Prior to the Member commencing or resuming employment as an RECE or engaging in the practice of early childhood education, as defined in section 2 of the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, the Member will arrange a mentoring relationship with a Mentor, who:

   i. is an RECE in good standing with the College,

   ii. is employed in a supervisory position,

   iii. has never been found guilty of professional misconduct and/or incompetence by the Discipline Committee of the College,

   iv. is not currently found to be incapacitated by the Fitness to Practise Committee of the College,

   v. is not currently the subject of allegations referred to the Discipline Committee or the Fitness to Practise Committee of the College, and

   vi. is pre-approved by the Director. In order to pre-approve the Mentor, the Member will provide the Director with all requested information, including (but not limited to) the name, registration number, telephone number, address and résumé of the Mentor.

   d. The Member will provide the Mentor with a copy of the following documents within 14 days of being notified that the Mentor has been approved by the Director, or within 14 days after the release of such documents, whichever is earliest:

   i. the Panel’s Order,

   ii. the Agreed Statement of Facts,

   iii. the Joint Submission on Penalty, and

   iv. the Panel’s Decision and Reasons.

   e. The Member will meet with the Mentor at least every 2 weeks after the Mentor has been approved by the Director to discuss the following subjects:

   i. review of the College’s Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice,

   ii. the acts or omissions by the Member, which resulted in the Discipline Committee finding the Member guilty of professional misconduct,

   iii. the potential consequences of the misconduct to the parents/children affected, and to the Member’s colleagues, profession and self,

   iv. the coursework the Member is ordered to complete, as set out in paragraph 3(a),

   v. strategies for preventing the misconduct from recurring, and

   vi. the Member’s daily practice and any issues that arise, to ensure that she is meeting the College’s Standards of Practice (without disclosing personal or identifying information about any of the children under the Member’s care, or clients of her employer(s)).

   f. The Member will complete a minimum of 2 mentorship sessions to the satisfaction of the Director prior to commencing or resuming employment as an RECE or engaging in the practice of early childhood education, as defined in section 2 of the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007.

   g. After a minimum of 7 sessions, the Member can seek the Director’s permission to stop participating in the mentorship sessions by providing the Director with a report by the Mentor that sets out the following:

   i. the dates the Member attended the sessions with the Mentor,

   ii. that the Mentor received a copy of the documents referred to in paragraph 3(d),

   iii. that the Mentor reviewed the documents set out in paragraph 3(d) and discussed the subjects set out in paragraph 3(e) with the Member, and

   iv. the Mentor’s assessment of the Member’s insight into her behaviour.

   h. All documents delivered by the Member to the College or the Mentor will be delivered by email, registered mail or courier, and the Member will retain proof of delivery.

   Other

   i. Within 14 days of commencing or resuming employment as an RECE, the Member will ensure that the Director is notified of the name, address and telephone number of all employers.

   j. The College may require proof of compliance with any of the terms in this Order at any time.

April 20, 2026

Katie Begley, RECE, Chair

Date

Footnotes

1. 1See section 33.1 of the Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, S.O. 2007, c. 7, Sched. 8, and Rule 8.15 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.
2. 2Early Childhood Educators Act, 2007, S.O. 2007, c. 7, Sched. 8.
3. 3Professional Misconduct, Ontario Regulation 223/08.
4. 4College of Early Childhood Educators’ Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice.
5. 5CECE v. Claudia Zyman, 2025 ONCECE 5, CECE v. Christine Hélène Bojkov, 2024 ONCECE 5, and CECE v. Amandeep Kaur (169247), 2025 ONCECE 10