ET v. Children’s Aid Society of Algoma, 2023 CFSRB 17

CHILD AND FAMILY SERVICES REVIEW BOARD

BETWEEN:

ET

Applicants

-and-

Children’s Aid Society of Algoma

Respondent

DECISION

Adjudicator: Daniel McSweeney Date: February 14, 2023 Citation: 2023 CFSRB 17 Indexed As: ET v Children’s Aid Society of Algoma (CYFSA s.120)

Introduction

1This is an Application filed with the Child and Family Services Review Board (“CFSRB”) under section 120 (4) 4 of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017, SO 2017, c.14, Sched.1 (the “Act”).

2This decision explains why the Application is not eligible for review by the CFSRB.

BACKGROUND

3The Applicant is the paternal grandmother of one Child (the “Child”). The Applicant alleged that the Child’s mother has exposed the Child to physical and sexual abuse and neglect throughout his life. The Applicant indicated that she, as well as the Child, have reported the alleged abuse to the Respondent, but that Respondent staff have done nothing to help. Most recently, the Applicant alleged that the Child’s mother assaulted the Child at school. The police were called; however, nothing was done.

4The Respondent has reportedly indicated that the Child has lied about the allegations against his mother. In addition, Respondent staff have indicated that they cannot do anything that would interfere with a Court order.

5The Applicant remains concerned with the mental health of the Child, as well as the health and welfare of the Child’s siblings.

THE LAW

6Section 120(4) of the Act states:

The following matters may be reviewed by the Board under this section:

1. Allegations that the society has refused to proceed with a complaint made by the complainant under section 119(1) as required under subsection 119(2).
2. Allegations that the society has failed to respond to the complainant’s complaint within the timeframe required by regulation.
3. Allegations that the society has failed to comply with the complaint review procedure or with any other procedural requirements under this Act relating to the review of complaints.
4. Allegations that the society has failed to comply with section 15(2).
5. Allegations that the society has failed to provide the complainant with reasons for a decision that affects the complainant’s interests.

7Section 15(2) of the Act ensures 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.”

8H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services (CFSA s. 68), 2012 CFSRB 4 (2012-02-01) (para. 51) examines the issue of who is in receipt of services.

Looking at the statute, the Society’s obligation to provide reasons in section 68.1 (4) 5 is not confined to “parents”. If that were the case, the obligation would be associated with section 2(2) (a) of the Act, like the right to be heard. The right to reasons for decisions that affect one’s interests is broad and recognizes that there may be persons other than parents who are involved with children under the Act and whose lives may be impacted by Society decisions. For example, the Board has held that foster parents or teachers who are the subject of an investigation by a society are receiving a service and are entitled to reasons relating to the decisions made in the investigation. The Board has also held that grandparents who have sought access to their grandchildren from a society that controls access have a right to reasons.

ANALYSIS

9The Applicant is the grandmother to the Child. She has expressed her concerns related to the health and safety of the Child while in the care of his mother.

10The right to be heard in the Act is limited to “children and young persons and their parents”. The definition of “parent” in the Act does not include foster parents or grandparents. As such, section 15(2) of the Act does not apply to the Applicant.

11I considered the application of H.L.B. v. Chatham-Kent Children’s Services to this Complaint. I have not been provided with any evidence that the Applicant is has received or is currently receiving any services or assistance from the Respondent related to access to the Child. Given that she has not received services from the Respondent, the Applicant is not eligible to be provided with reasons for any decisions that the Respondent has taken in relation to the Child.

12I also note that the Respondent cannot share any information with the Applicant regarding any actions and outcomes related to her complaints given privacy and confidentiality provisions in Part X of the Act. While the Applicant is a relative of the Child, she has the same standing as a teacher or any other concerned person who reports to a child welfare agency. She does not have the right to information regarding the Child, the Child’s mother, and any outcomes related to a complaint.

13While I can empathize with the Applicant’s concerns about the health, safety, and well-being of her grandson, the CFSRB does not have jurisdiction to review the Application under sections 120 (4) 4 and 5 of the Act.

14For these reasons, the CFSRB lacks jurisdiction to review the Application.

order

15The Application is dismissed.

confidentiality order

16Pursuant 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.