Young Person v. Provincial Director, 2026 ONCRB 7

Custody Review Board

This case relates to the Youth Criminal Justice Act, S.C. 2002, c.1 ("YCJA"). Under sections 110(1) and 129 of the YCJA, no one is allowed to make public any information that would identify a youth who is in detention or custody. Additionally, no one is permitted to disclose the information contained in this document to anyone unless authorized by the YCJA. Additionally, the proceedings of the Custody Review Board ("CRB") are private. Therefore, all identifying information in this decision has been removed.

No one can show the unredacted decision to anyone else (except the Applicant's lawyer or others named in the YCJA) or make it public by putting it "online" or giving it to the media. There may be legal consequences if this information is shared contrary to the YCJA in accordance with s.138(1) of the YCJA.

BETWEEN:

Young Person Applicant

-and-

Provincial Director Respondent

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

Adjudicator: Henry Pateman Date: January 20, 2026 Citation: 2026 ONCRB 7 Indexed as: Young Person v Provincial Director (CYFSA s.152)

OVERVIEW

1This is an Application with the Custody Review Board ("CRB") for a review of the Applicant's placement under subsection 152(1)(a) of the Child, Youth and Family Services Act 2017, S.O. 2017, c.14, Sched. 1 (the "CYFSA"). The Applicant seeks a review of the Provincial Director's decision to place him at the [FACILITY 1], a secure detention facility near [city 1], [province]. He is seeking a transfer to [FACILITY 2], an open facility that is more accessible to his family for in-person visits.

2In conducting this review, I spoke to:

• the Applicant;
• RA, Youth Services Worker ("YSW"), [FACILITY 1];
• WH, Psychologist, [FACILITY 1];
• CR, Youth Case Worker, [FACILITY 2]
• VS, Applicant's Probation Officer ("PO");
• JT, Social Worker, [FACILITY 1]; and
• [mother], Applicant's mother.

3In addition, I reviewed the following documents:

• The Application dated [date];
• Warrant Remanding a Young Person dated [date]; and
• Level of Detention Assessment form dated [date].

ISSUE

4Is the Applicant's placement at [FACILITY 1] appropriate to meet his needs?

RESULTS

5After conducting the needs assessment, under subsection 152 (7) of the CYFSA, the CRB can make recommendations to the Provincial Director in regard to reviewing the level of detention of the young person, including the particular place where a young person is held or to which the young person has been transferred.

6I find that the Applicant's placement at [FACILITY 1] is appropriate to meet his needs, and I confirm the Provincial Director's decision to place him at this facility.

ANALYSIS

7The Applicant is [age] years old. In [month year], he was arrested for several criminal charges that included assault and property-related crimes. The Applicant was released on bail after being detained for a period in both secure and open custody facilities. In [month year], he was arrested, charged, and released for failing to comply with the terms of his outstanding release orders. In [month year], the Applicant was arrested for assault with a weapon, firearms-related offences, and several additional charges related to his failure to comply with the terms of his outstanding release orders.

8After his most recent arrest, his Level of Detention was reviewed by the Provincial Director, and he was placed in a secure facility ([FACILITY 1]) awaiting trial.

The Applicant's Prior History in Open Detention Facilities

9In [month year], the Applicant was placed in a secure facility. After approximately [number] days, the Applicant was reassessed as eligible for open detention and placed at [FACILITY 2] in [city 2], [province], where he remained for approximately [number] days until his court-ordered release.

10The Applicant noted during his initial interview that he preferred open custody, as it offered a more positive atmosphere, was less regimented, and allowed visitors, including his mother and friends. The Applicant also reported that an open custody environment was easier for him to manage his anxiety and ADHD.

11CR, a Youth Case Worker at [FACILITY 2], confirmed that the Applicant had previously been at [FACILITY 2]. She reported that the Applicant did take some time to adjust to the environment, but eventually he started to interact with staff and peers and was generally cooperative. He eventually attended school after he was advised that his attendance was a requirement to remain in an open facility. She confirmed the Applicant had significant learning, reading and comprehension barriers, but was an active participant in school programming.

12She reported no behavioural issues while at the facility, other than a minor shoving incident with another resident.

The Applicant's Current and Prior History in Secure Detention Facilities

13In [month year], the Applicant was placed at [FACILITY 1] for approximately 15 days.

14JT, a Social Worker at [FACILITY 1], reported that during his initial stay at [FACILITY 1], the Applicant found it difficult to adjust to the environment. The Applicant was a loner who had difficulty expressing himself appropriately and kept himself isolated the majority of the time. The Applicant was non-compliant, refused to follow staff instructions, and would not actively engage with staff or peers for extended periods. When confronted about his non-compliance, the Applicant would become belligerent and had frequent verbally abusive outbursts.

15WH, the [FACILITY 1] psychologist, reported that the Applicant has limited coping skills and has a hard time expressing himself. This lack of coping and expression skills impacts the Applicant's behaviour as his frustration often results in outbursts of aggression.

16WH reported an incident during his first placement at [FACILITY 1] in which the Applicant's name had been removed from the call list on two separate occasions by an unknown resident, resulting in his inability to call his mother. The Applicant did not report these incidents to the staff. On the third incident of his name being erased, instead of reporting the issue to staff, the Applicant became upset, belligerent and uncooperative with staff, which resulted in the Applicant barricading his door with his mattress. The Applicant began banging his head against the wall, and staff members had to physically restrain the Applicant to ensure his safety. One-to-one staffing protocols were implemented to ensure his safety.

17Since his recent placement at [FACILITY 1], the Applicant has been on a one-to-one staffing protocol because of mental health concerns and self-injurious behaviour. He continues to be characterized by staff as guarded, maintains minimal peer and staff interactions and struggles with anger management and anxiety.

The Applicant's Current Needs

18In conducting a review and making a recommendation under subsection 152(7)(a)(i) of CYFSA, I must consider whether the current facility at which the Applicant is being held or has been transferred is appropriate or not to meet the Applicant's needs.

19The Applicant is seeking a transfer to [FACILITY 2], a facility that is more accessible for his family, as [FACILITY 1], although close to his hometown of [city 3], [province], is not easily accessible by public transportation. He is also seeking a transfer to an open detention facility, as he believes it represents a more positive environment for his well-being and will better meet his personal needs.

The Applicant's Needs for Access to Family Visitation

20The Applicant requested to be moved to an institution that is more accessible, where his mother would be able to visit in person on a more consistent basis. He felt being closer to his mother would reduce his loneliness and anxiety, which in turn would reduce his outbursts of anger.

21[mother], the Applicant's mother, reported that she had visited her son at [FACILITY 2] several times and had the opportunity for regular video calls, which helped her son stay connected to her.

22She noted that her attendance at [FACILITY 2] was easier to plan, as it was on public transportation routes, which she relies on exclusively. She further reported that it is difficult to visit her son at [FACILITY 1], as the facility is not accessible via public transportation and requires her to use private transportation services, which is a financial burden for her.

23[mother] stated that she has had no video calls with her son since he was transferred to [FACILITY 1], but speaks to him daily via phone.

24[mother] reported that she is supportive of a transfer to a secure facility that is more accessible from her home and that her son would benefit from regular visits from her. She reported that although [FACILITY 1] is physically the closest secure facility to her, facilities in [city 4] or the [region] area are more accessible as they are on public transportation routes.

25CT, a social worker at [FACILITY 1], noted that the Applicant has daily access to his mother via the phone, but that no video calls have been arranged due to his behaviour and concerns regarding his safety. Staff at [FACILITY 1] report that the Applicant has not made any requests for video calls with his mother and has consistently been unwilling to provide information to staff for these calls to occur.

26VS, the Applicant's PO, reported that the Applicant's mother has had limited involvement with her and offers little information related to her son's behaviours, the family dynamic (which she characterized as being strained), or strategies related to case management or reintegration. She noted that there has been very little family involvement in the youth justice system, and there are no support systems in place for the Applicant or the family during or after his judicial process. A Case Management/Reintegration Plan does not currently exist but is expected to be completed in the next several weeks.

27I find that [FACILITY 1] meets the Applicant's needs to maintain consistent personal family contact. The Applicant does have daily phone calls with his mother, and his accessibility to video calls is only hindered by the Applicant's behaviour and ongoing refusal to start the process. [FACILITY 1] can provide video access and in-person visitation upon request.

The Applicant's Mental Health Needs and Support

28During his interview, the Applicant noted that he has been diagnosed with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), for which he receives medication. He also reported having anxiety and anger management issues. He noted that while he was in the community, he was seeing a counsellor for his anxiety and anger management issues, which he reports are caused by frustration linked to his ADHD.

29WH reported involvement with the Applicant after his [month year] incident, where he had an emotional outburst that required physical restraint and the development of a safety plan. That safety plan, which had remained in place until [date], involved a one-to-one staff protocol to ensure his safety and to minimize the opportunity for self-injurious behaviour, which he had exhibited.

30WH reported that the Applicant has identifiable deficits in his ability to cope and his use of descriptive language. He is unresponsive most of the time and is reclusive, often spending long periods of time staring out the window and not speaking. When he does interact, he is unable to express himself effectively and is prone to emotional outbursts due to the frustration he feels.

31[mother] reported that the Applicant is easily influenced and lacks the coping or social skills to manage himself appropriately. She feels a secure environment is better for her son, as it enables him to receive the care and support needed to stabilize his behaviour and to teach him that his actions have consequences. She reported that her son does not understand consequences and that placing him in a less restrictive environment will not teach him responsibility.

32WH reported that the one-to-one staffing and her daily visits with the Applicant are providing opportunities for informal assessments and the development of trust and relationships with herself and staff. She reports the Applicant is more engaging with staff and peers, having conversations beyond one-word answers and interacting more, i.e. playing cards and accessing the gym. She feels this progress will only assist future assessment opportunities.

33WH reported some progress with the Applicant in terms of behaviour and willingness to talk, and that a re-assessment took place on [date]. Although the Applicant remains unstable, the staffing protocol has been reduced to a 15-minute watch window, where staff check in with the Applicant every 15 minutes to ensure his safety.

34[mother] also noted that she was concerned about moving her son to a different facility because instability, i.e. moving around and changing environments, causes her son's anxiety to rise, which also causes his ADHD symptoms to worsen. She noted that stabilization – keeping things constant – with her son is an important element in reducing and managing his anxiety.

35CR, a Youth Case Worker at [FACILITY 2], reported that there are no on-site support resources for residents. All medical, mental health, and counselling supports are external/community resources, based on individual needs. This identification would require further assessment of the Applicant once at [FACILITY 2] and may delay any counselling or mental health support.

36I find the current setting meets the mental health and personal needs of the Applicant. [FACILITY 1] has the on-site mental health staff and programming support that the Applicant requires. Progress in terms of the Applicant's stabilization has been identified, which will provide increased opportunities for required assessments in both mental health and academic support and programming.

Need for a Less Restrictive Environment

37The Applicant advised that he found the open custody environment easier to deal with as he had more flexibility and had an easier time managing his anxiety and ADHD symptoms. He also reported that being in an open custody facility would allow for in-person visits from his mother and friends to occur more often.

38The Applicant provided no other information related to specific needs or goals that would be hampered by his remaining in a secure custody facility.

39[mother], the mother of the Applicant, is not in favour of having her son in a less restrictive environment. She noted that when he was on release within the community, he did not adhere to the conditions of his release and refused to listen to her, often arguing with her about being home by curfew or being at home at all.

40Based on all the circumstances, I find that a secure facility is more appropriate to support and manage the Applicant's current needs. The Applicant's instability and need for continued mental health supports and intervention are of greater concern and outweigh the need to move to an open facility.

Academic needs

41Academically, the Applicant reported that he was currently in Grade [number] but has learning disabilities related to reading, writing and spelling. The Applicant noted that some of his anxiety centers around his lack of reading, writing, and spelling skills, which he does not like to discuss. Since he arrived at [FACILITY 1], the Applicant has not attended school, as he does not like school.

42[mother] reported that her son has been formally identified with several learning disabilities and has had an ongoing Individualized Action Plan (IAP) since high school. She reported that her son has not attended traditional school programming for many years. She confirmed that her son has a disability related to reading, basic writing skills and comprehension, and the established IAP focuses on life skills rather than academics. She also confirmed that her son was seeing a tutor before his arrest.

43WH, the psychologist at [FACILITY 1], confirmed that the Applicant has not attended academic programming since he arrived at [FACILITY 1]. She is aware of the identified concerns centred around his ADHD diagnosis and the associated level of anxiety felt by the Applicant when discussing school. The Applicant has refused to attend school or participate in any academic assessments. He continues to be offered academic programming, but refuses.

44I find that [FACILITY 1] meets the Applicant's educational needs and his academic requirements. The Applicant has access to educational programming and support while at [FACILITY 1], with accessibility to programming and ongoing support hindered only by the Applicant's behaviour and ongoing refusal to start the process. [FACILITY 1] has the capacity to assist in the assessment and ongoing support of this Applicant and his educational needs.

CONCLUSION

45[FACILITY 1] is appropriate to meet the Applicant's personal, mental health, and educational needs, as well as his need for consistent communication and support from his family. By remaining in a secure facility, the Applicant is afforded an appropriate level of care that is required. The Applicant's need for in-person visits, and thus the need for a transfer to a more accessible facility, are outweighed by the identified concerns related to the Applicant's mental health and the on-site professional health care available within the secure facility of [FACILITY 1]. It provides a stabilizing environment where the opportunity to develop an effective internal and external support program exists as he navigates the youth justice system.

RECOMMENDATION

46For the above reasons, I find that the level of detention determined by the Provincial Director at [FACILITY 1] is appropriate to meet the Applicant's needs. I find the Applicant is not suitable for placement in an open facility and should remain in a secure detention facility.

CONFIDENTIALITY ORDER

Parties and their representatives must not use, share, discuss or disclose any CRB documents or decisions, or any other documents or information provided or used in this Application, with anyone, including through the media or online. The CRB prohibits the use of any of this information for any purpose outside of the CRB's proceedings, except with an order of the Court or the CRB, as appropriate.