S.C. v. North Eastern Ontario Family and Children's Services, 2021 CFSRB 7

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

S.C.

Applicant

-and-

North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Michele O'Connor
Date: February 03, 2021
Citation: 2021 CFSRB 7
Indexed As: SC v North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’ Services (CYFSA s.120)

APPEARANCES

S.C., Applicant
Self-represented

North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services, Respondent
Suzanna Bala, Counsel

INTRODUCTION

1. The Applicant and North Eastern Ontario Family and Children’s Services (the “Society) entered into a Settlement Agreement (the “Agreement”) during mediation on November 12, 2020 providing for full settlement of all issues raised by the Applicant in her application to the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) filed September 28, 2020.

2. The Agreement between the parties provided for an implementation date of December 3, 2020, and a non-compliance date of December 14, 2020.

3. On December 2, 2020, the Society sent the Closing Letter. On December 9, 2020, the Applicant filed her written complaint alleging that the Society failed to comply with terms of the Settlement Agreement.

4. In accordance with the CFSRB’s mediation procedure, a teleconference meeting was held on January 29, 2021, to determine whether the Society had complied with the Settlement Agreement. The Applicant participated as did NEOFACS legal counsel, Suzanna Bala, Service manager, Maria Barbuto, and Program Supervisor, Andrea Harrington, on behalf of the Society. Both parties filed materials and made submissions.

5. The CFSRB has reviewed the materials filed by the parties on the issue of non-compliance and has taken into consideration the submissions of the parties at the teleconference. The CFSRB finds that the Society complied with the terms of the Agreement but there are 2 areas in the letter which require correction. The Society has agreed to issue an amended closing letter with the two corrections.

BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS

6. This application consists of the following complaints under section 120(4) of the Child Youth and family Services Act, 2017 S,O, 2017, c.14, Sched.1: the Society is alleged to have refused to proceed with a complaint made by the Applicant (section 120(4)1 CYFSA, 2017); The Society has failed to respond to the Applicant’s complaint within the required time (section 120(4)2 CYFSA, 2017); and, 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 services she is receiving (section 120(4)4 CYFSA, 2017). Specifically:

• The Society failed to respond to the Applicant’s IPRC complaint; and

• The Society did not assist the Applicant and her husband with access denial issues or with concerns raised by them about parental alienation which they believe is a child protection issue.

7. The question for the CFSRB is whether the Society did what it was required to do under the Agreement with respect to any actions or timelines and whether any explanations provided sufficient detail to enable the Applicant to understand what factors the Society considered in making decisions and why. The CFSRB’s sole focus at the teleconference is on the agreement itself.

8. The parties’ settlement agreement included terms that the Society would provide a closing letter for the Applicant which would include the following details:

• The nature of the 2 investigations undertaken in 2020 pertaining to LP;

• Where did these allegations fall on the Eligibility Spectrum and how were the allegations pertaining to LP classified by the Society;

• What steps were taken by the Society in the course of these investigations including who was interviewed and any collateral contacts;

• What was the outcome of the investigations including the conclusions reached and why; and

• What services were recommended and what were the responses of the respective parties.

1. The parties agree that the Applicant can use the closing letter in any future domestic court proceedings if she wishes to do so;

2. The Society will schedule the IPRC of the Applicant’s previously filed complaint if, after receiving the closing letter, she wishes to pursue this course of action either to explore questions arising from the closing letter or if she wishes a more fulsome explanation of what happened to her concerns about her step-son. She needs only to contact Rada Deletic at 705 360-7100, Ext. 5400, to trigger the scheduling of that panel.

3. As a general approach to an allegation of non-compliance, the CFSRB looks at the terms of the settlement and asks the Applicant why he/she believes that the Society did not meet its obligation. The Society is then given the opportunity to respond or elaborate on the contents of its letter.

The Society Letter

10. On December 2, 2020, the Society sent its Closing letter to the Applicant.

11. The Applicant submits that the letter is inadequate. The contents are not consistent with information she obtained in disclosure received after the mediation in November, and she has proof that her husband’s reported lack of cooperation with the investigation is not correct. She proposes that the Society provide another “Closing Letter” containing corrected information - specifically, remove the reference to MC being uncooperative in the first protection investigation; and, add reference to a Case Conference having been offered as a possible resolution but the child’s mother (S.P.) refused to participate as she had done with the offer of ADR.

12. After some discussion, the Society agreed to provide an amended “Closing Letter” containing the changes requested by the Applicant, specifically:

• the reference to MC being uncooperative will be removed; and

• the Society’s offer of a Case Conference and SP’s refusal to participate will be added.

13. . The Society also agrees that the Applicant’s option of an ICRP on request if she has any further questions or concerns arising from the amended letter remains open to her. As well, the settlement agreement provided for an exception to the confidentiality provisions of the CFSRB mediation process such that the Applicant was free to use the closing letter in ongoing court proceedings if she wished. That exception applies to the amended letter.

DECISION

14. The file is now closed as settled.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

15. Except as specifically provided above at paragraph 13, pursuant to Rules 9.3 and 9.4 of the CFSRB’s Rules of Procedure, parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CFSRB documents or decisions or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application with anyone, including through the media or online. The CFSRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CFSRB’s proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CFSRB, as appropriate.

Dated at Toronto, February 3, 2021

Michele O’Connor

Michele O'Connor, Member