CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD
A.T.
v.
Valoris for Children and Adults of Prescott-Russell
REASONS FOR DECISION
Indexed as: A.T. v. Valoris for Children and Adults of Prescott-Russell (CFSA s.68)
INTRODUCTION
1A.T. (the “Applicant”) filed an application with the Child and Family Services Review Board (the “Board”) on August 29, 2014, pursuant to sections 68.1(4)4 and 68.1(4)5 of the Child and Family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.C.11, as amended, (the “Act”) regarding a matter relating to services sought or received from Valoris for Children and Adults of Prescott-Russell (the “Society”).
2The Applicant alleges that the Society has not listened to her service concerns or heard her when decisions were made and has not provided her with reasons for decisions that affected her interests regarding the following:
- Concerns relating to the safety, hygiene and daily care of the Applicant’s son by the foster parents.
- Concern that the Society has forbidden the Applicant from making false accusations about the foster family.
- Concern that the Society workers [ ] and [ ] were responsible for a breach of the Applicant’s privacy on July 31, 2014 in the Society’s parking lot in [city].
- Concern that the Society continued to videotape the Applicant’s access visits with her son after her consent expired and the associated decision of the Society to refuse to provide her with copies of the access visits recordings after having told her they would be provided.
3The Society argued that it had satisfied all of the requirements under the Act with respect to having heard the Applicant and having provided her with reasons for decisions it made.
4An oral hearing in this matter was held on October November 7, 2014 and December 10, 2014. The Board reserved its decision. The Board finds in favour of the Applicant about issues 1, 2 and 4, and dismisses issue 3 for the reasons below.
BACKGROUND
5The Applicant’s complaints regard the actions of the Society during the one year period her son, born [ ], (“the child”), was in the Society’s care.
6The child was apprehended at birth as a result of the Society’s opinion that the Applicant was unable to provide the level of care and supervision he required as a result of her mental health issues and, possibly, of her physical disability.
7After being apprehended the child was placed at one of the Society’s foster home and remained there for the entire period of temporary wardship. The Child was made a ward of the Crown in September of 2014.
8During the child’s stay in the foster home, the Applicant exercised supervised access visits at the Society’s office 2 to 4 times per week, as organised by the Society.
ANALYSIS
9The Board has authority to determine if the Applicant was heard when she raised concerns with the Society, and when decisions were made. The Board also has the authority to determine if the Applicant received reasons for decisions made that affect her interests.
10The Board’s authority and the Society’s obligations are found in the following sections of the Act:
Section 2(2) a:
2(2) Service providers shall ensure (a) that children and their parents have an opportunity where appropriate to be heard and represented when decisions affecting their interests are made and to be heard when they have concerns about the services they are receiving.
Section 68.1(4):
68.1(4) The following matters may be reviewed by the Board under this section:
(4) Allegations that the society has failed to comply with clause 2(2)(a).
(5) Allegations that the society has failed to provide the complainant with reasons for a decision that affects the complainant’s interests.
11In P.O. v. Family and Children’s Services Niagara, 2012 CFSRB 33, at paras. 13-14, the Board described the purpose of s.68.1 (4) and (5) and addressed s. 68.1 (4) 4 as follows:
The obligations under s. 68.1 (4) 4 and 5 reflect the importance of active participation for parents, providing them with the opportunity to have some degree of influence in the process. This is facilitated through genuine communication, giving applicants the opportunity to have input into decision making and to have enough information to make informed responses to, or accept decisions.
To be heard involves active listening, discussions, the society’s taking steps to address the Applicant’s concerns and communicating this to her so that she feels that her concerns are taken seriously and dealt with thoroughly.
12With respect to s. 68.1 (4) 5, what constitutes sufficient reasons is a matter to be examined in each case in the context of that particular situation. This may include an examination of the timeliness and the level of detail provided. A parent must be given sufficient