RB v. Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa, 2022 CFSRB 62

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

RB Applicant

-and-

Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Silvia Novak Date: December 08, 2022 Citation: 2022 CFSRB 62 Indexed As: RB v Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa (CYFSA s.120)

WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS

RB, Applicant Self-represented

Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa, Respondent Sakshi Chadha, Counsel

Introduction

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 Applicant is the father of two children currently involved with the Ottawa Children’s Aid Society. The Applicant is concerned the Society is failing to protect the children from physical and emotional abuse by their mother. In his October 2022 application, the Applicant acknowledged his concerns are currently before the courts.

3After review of the Application and related attachments, the Board issued a case management direction (CMD) on October 31, 2022, directing the parties to provide written submissions to the CFSRB on whether the issues in the Application are separate and different from the substantive issues before the court.

4Based on the review of the materials including the submissions of both parties, I find the issues set out in the Application have been and/or continue to be before the Court.

the law

5Section 120(8)(a) of the Act states:

The Board shall not conduct a review of a complaint under this section if the subject of the complaint,

(a) Is an issue that has been decided by the court or is before the court

6The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled in Children’s Aid Society of Waterloo v. DD, 2011 ONCA 441 that the existence of child protection proceedings does not bar the CFSRB from reviewing complaints about services received from a children’s aid society if the complaints are separate and different from the substantive issues before the court.

background

7In his Application to the Board the Applicant outlines the various concerns he has regarding the Society’s actions, or lack thereof, in relation to the mother’s physical and mental health issues, drug abuse, failure to meet the children’s education and medical needs as well as their general care and wellbeing, inappropriate use of medication, neglect of the children, a sexual assault of the older child and the children’s exposure to domestic violence and multiple inappropriate adults. He also outlines concerns he has about the truthfulness of the worker’s court documents and their change in position on where the children should reside.

8The Respondent’s position is that the Application should be dismissed on the basis that issues raised have been decided by or remain before the court. The Respondent indicates the Applicant and his representative have recently attended court proceedings and filed affidavits addressing the same and/or similar concerns as set out in the Application. They cite an Order of the Court dated November 1, 2022 placing the children in temporary joint care and custody of the parents subject to the supervision of the Society and pending the disposition of the Child Protection Application. They also cite the Reasons for Decision dated October 14, 2022 which detail the Applicant’s concerns.

9The Applicant would like the CFSRB to review the matter as he feels the Society and the Court have failed his children. In his submissions, the Applicant indicated he does not accept the Respondent’s position, reiterating his concerns about the mother and the Society’s actions or lack thereof. He further advises that he has a complaint submitted against the judge who made the November 1st, 2022 Order.

analysis

10In reviewing the materials, I find that the Applicant’s main concern, specifically the children being back in their mother’s care, was an issue that was decided by the Court Order of November 1st, 2022 and is therefore not eligible to be reviewed by the Board.

11I also find that all the concerns the Applicant outlined in his Application to the Board were before the Court through his affidavits and cross-motion. The Court has been made aware of his belief that the mother is unfit to care for the children, that the Society had not fully investigated his concerns and that they changed their position without explanation on where the children should reside. The Society likewise filed information before the Court outlining their concerns and how they came to their position.

12Although the Applicant does not agree with the court outcome, there is ample documentary evidence that the issues he raises in this Application were placed before the Court and that the litigation remains ongoing. The Board is therefore prohibited by Section 120(8)(a) of the Act to review this complaint.

order

13The Application is dismissed.

confidentiality order

14Pursuant 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.