CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD
BETWEEN:
JR
Applicant
-and-
Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton
Respondent
DECISION
Adjudicator: Daniel McSweeney
Indexed As: JR v Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton (CYFSA s.120)
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND
1This is an Application filed under section 120 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, S.O. 2017, c. 14, Sched.1, (the “Act”).
2The Application was found eligible to proceed under sections 120(4)4 of the Act: The Applicant was not given the opportunity to be heard and represented when decisions affecting her interests were made or a chance to be heard when she raised concerns about the service she is receiving.
3The Applicant is the biological mother of LR and SR (the “Children”). The Applicant’s stepsister (MB) has legal custody of the Children. The Applicant does not have any formal access rights to the Children pursuant to a Court order.
4The Applicant’s complaint requests information regarding the health and welfare of the Children. She also indicated that she would like to know what she had to do in order to regain access and custody of the Children. She indicated that the Respondent’s staff had not returned her calls.
THE LAW
5Section 120 (1) of the Act provides that, if a person has “a complaint in respect of a service sought or received from a society [and the complaint] relates to a matter described in subsection (4), the person who sought or received the service may decide” to make a complaint to either the society or the CFSRB.
6Subsection 4 of section 120 allows the CFSRB to review a complaint that addresses allegations that a society has filed to comply with subsection 15(2).
7Subsection 15(2) addresses the rights of children and parents to be heard and represented. It reads:
“Service providers shall ensure that children and young persons and their parents have an opportunity 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.”
8A “parent” is defined in section 2(2) of the Act as:
a) the person who has lawful custody of the child; or
b) if more than one person has lawful custody of the child, all of the persons
who have lawful custody of the child, excluding any person who is unavailable
or unable to act, as the context requires.
ANALYSIS
9In analyzing the claim, firstly, I focused on whether the Applicant had the legal status of parent, thereby giving her the right to be heard under section 15(2) of the Act.
10The Respondent has indicated that the Children are in the legal custody of MB. The Applicant does not have lawful custody of the Children, neither does she have any formal access rights as per the Court. MB is considered the parent of the Children as per section 2(2) of the Act. Given the definitions in the Act, the Applicant no longer is the legal parent of the Children, and therefore does not have a right to be heard under section 15(2) of the Act.
11I find that the Applicant does not have the legal status as parent of the Children, and therefore she is ineligible to have her complaint reviewed by the CFSRB under section 120(4) of the Act.
ORDER
12The Application is dismissed.
CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER
13Pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the Board’s Rules of Procedure parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any Board documents or decisions or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application with anyone including through the media or on-line. The Board prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the Board’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the Board, as appropriate.
Dated at Toronto, this 22nd day of December, 2020.
Daniel McSweeney
Daniel McSweeney
Member