WARNING
The court hearing this matter directs that the following notice be attached to the file:
This is a case under Part III of the Child and Family Services Act and is subject to one or more of subsections 48(7), 45(8) and 45(9) of the Act. These subsections and subsection 85(3) of the Child and Family Services Act, which deals with the consequences of failure to comply, read as follows:
45.—(7) Order excluding media representatives or prohibiting publication.— The court may make an order,
(c) prohibiting the publication of a report of the hearing or a specified part of the hearing,
where the court is of the opinion that . . . publication of the report, . . ., would cause emotional harm to a child who is a witness at or a participant in the hearing or is the subject of the proceeding.
(8) Prohibition: identifying child.— No person shall publish or make public information that has the effect of identifying a child who is a witness at or a participant in a hearing or the subject of a proceeding, or the child's parent or foster parent or a member of the child's family.
(9) Idem: order re adult.— The court may make an order prohibiting the publication of information that has the effect of identifying a person charged with an offence under this Part.
85.—(3) Idem.— A person who contravenes subsection 45(8) or 76(11) (publication of identifying information) or an order prohibiting publication made under clause 45(7)(c) or subsection 45(9), and a director, officer or employee of a corporation who authorizes, permits or concurs in such a contravention by the corporation, is guilty of an offence and on conviction is liable to a fine of not more than $10,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than three years, or to both.
ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
CITATION: Children’s Aid Society of Halton Region v. T.T., 2013 ONCJ 539
DATE: October 3, 2013
COURT FILE No.: Halton 263/13
BETWEEN:
CHILDREN’S AID SOCIETY, REGION OF HALTON,
Applicant,
— AND —
T.T. ,
Respondent.
Before Justice Roselyn Zisman
Heard on August 16, 2013
Reasons for Judgment released on October 3, 2013
Lucia Spampinato ................................................................ counsel for the applicant society
Obey Regina Ejikike ...................................................................... counsel for the respondent
Todd More .................................................... counsel for the Office of the Children’s Lawyer,
legal representative for the child
ZISMAN J.:
[1] This is a temporary care and custody motion regarding the child J. B.-T. born […], 1998 (“J.” or “the child”). The child was apprehended from the care of her mother T.T. (“the mother”) on June 6th, 2013. The child’s father is M.D.B. (“the father”). He has not yet been served and the society is still in the process of considering if he qualifies as a “parent” pursuant to the Child and Family Services Act.
[2] The society seeks an order that the child remain in the care and custody of the society with access at its discretion. The child’s mother seeks a return of J. to her care and J. wishes to return home.
[3] The proceeding was before the court on June 11th at which time the mother was not in attendance as she was ill. A without prejudice order was made placing J. in the care of the society. The motion was adjourned to June 20th and at that time counsel was appointed for J. The motion was again adjourned at the request of the mother and Mr. Moore, who had been appointed to represent J. to August 15th and then to August 22nd when it was argued on its merits.
[4] As J. was in the courtroom when this motion was argued and was very anxious about the results, I advised all parties that I was not prepared to allow J. to return home and would release my reasons later. These are my reasons.
BACKGROUND
[5] J. resided with her mother and father, her older sister, D. B-T. (“D.”) and her younger brother M.B. in Tennessee.
[6] In 2005, the mother moved to Canada to be closer to her family as the mother was experiencing health issues and left the children with the father.
[7] During the time J. resided with her father she was subjected to physical abuse by her father and sexual abuse by a male adult who was a friend of her father’s. J. was hospitalized three times due to suicide attempts. The family was involved with child protective services.
[8] The mother received a custody order for both of her daughters in September 2011 and in October 2011 both J. and her sister D. moved to this jurisdiction to reside with their mother.
EVENTS LEADING UP TO THE APPREHENSION
[9] In February 2012, J.’s teacher reported to the society the following concerns:
a. J.’s mother had four previous heart attacks;
b. J. was not receiving treatment for the physical and sexual abuse she suffered in Tennessee because the mother had not obtained health care coverage for her;
c. J. was self-harming; and
d. J. was having physical altercations with her sister D. and the mother was not able to protect J. due to her physical and mental state.
[10] These concerns were investigated by the society. The society verified that the mother had few social supports or resources in place to assist J. with her previous trauma and to deal with J.’s current behaviours. The society assigned a worker to support the mother and J. in connecting J. to Halton Trauma Centre and to ensure that J. and the mother were attending all of their appointments.
[11] In April 2012, the society received information from the Halton Regional Police Service that the mother had become aware and reported that J. was being sexually abused by a family friend. Further investigation revealed that J. had been in a relationship with a 30 year old male for the previous 6 months. The perpetrator had been a long-time friend of the mother and maternal grandmother. The perpetrator was arrested and a criminal trial was scheduled in which J. would be required to testify.
[12] J. called the society worker to advise that she told her mother she was having trouble at school because her peers were against her and the mother told her she could leave home and go to a group home. The society also received a call from a counsellor from the Halton Trauma Centre that the mother had cancelled an appointment for J. and she was having difficulty re-scheduling.
[13] In January 2013, the society received a call from a social worker at J.’s school that she had not been attending school.
[14] In January and February 2013, the society received calls from Halton Trauma Centre advising their concerns that the mother was continually missing appointments and it was difficult for J. to obtain the counselling she needed if she did not attend regularly.
[15] During telephone conference calls between the mother, the society worker and the counsellor, the mother was advised of these concerns. The mother explained that due to her medical conditions he had difficulty taking J. to the appointments but that she now understood the need for J. to receive treatment. The mother also said she believed J. used drugs when at a friend’s sleepover and she believed her own health issues where having an effect on J.
[16] In April and May 2013, the mother told the social worker that she takes oxycontin to relieve her pain. The mother also told the worker that she had been hospitalized for 4 days six weeks ago and left J. with D. who was 18 years old at the time. The mother also stated that she is afraid to leave her home and only goes out for her doctor’s appointments and to get groceries. The mother admitted to the society worker that she knew she was not been following through with the recommendations for herself and J. The mother also told the social worker that she was feeling stressed and was again going to stay with her mother and leave J. with her sister D. The mother also reported that she had let a 17 year old male who uses drugs stay at her home because he needed a place to stay.
[17] In May 2013, a victim witness support worker reported that J. was not getting the trial preparation she deserved, that the mother could not commit to anything, she was worried about J.’s well-being and that the mother had left J. with her sister D. because the mother needed respite.
[18] On May 31st, 2013 J. telephoned the society worker with the support of her victim support worker and advised that:
a. She was suspended from school for punching a boy in the head because he made fun of her;
b. Sometimes her mother makes her feel scared;
c. Her mother makes everything about herself, even when it is not;
d. J. wants her mother to get help;
e. Her one dream would be to leave home for a while so her mother could get some help;
f. J. does not believe her mother would go get some help; and
g. J. felt she could stay home with her mother throughout the court process with the help of the victim support worker and her school counsellor.
[19] J. was scheduled to testify on June 6th and 7th, 2013 at the criminal trial of the male accused of sexually assaulting her. On June 5th the society worker telephoned the mother to ensure she would be attending court with J. The mother reported that her health was suffering due to testifying herself the week before at the trial and that J. would tear her apart at any moment she could because she was angry at her. The mother confirmed that she would attend court the next day with J.
[20] The society arranged for a taxi to pick up J. and the mother to take them to court. When the taxi arrived the mother and J. were still asleep and therefore they did not arrive at court until just before it started.
[21] On the morning of June 6th a counsellor from J.’s school reported that a male student advised that he had been talking with J. on Facebook the previous night and she disclosed she had been cutting herself and was going to kill herself after she finished testifying.
[22] On June 6th the society worker attended at court and met with the victim services support worker who advised that:
a. J. has tried to speak to her by telephone privately the night before and the mother would not allow it, put the call on speaker and then ended the conversation;
b. J. called the worker later that night crying and said she could not live with the mother any longer but she would be fine overnight;
c. That morning J. showed her razor cuts on her forearm and told her that she cut herself because of her home life;
d. J. told her that the maternal grandmother, with whom J. her mother and sister had been residing, kicked them out because she and J. suspected the mother stole the grandmother’s oxycontin pills;
e. The worker was concerned about J. because the mother had avoided bringing J. to her trial preparation meetings and counselling appointments; and
f. The mother was making the trial about her and not about J. who is the victim
[23] On June 6th, the society worker met with J. privately at court. The following issues were reported:
a. She was having a hard time at home because her mother was mean to her;
b. The mother constantly threatens to leave J. alone which was her biggest fear;
c. J. wanted to speak to the victim witness worker alone but her mother would not allow it;
d. J. and her maternal grandmother believe the mother is using drugs because she is acting differently; they believe the mother stole the grandmother’s oxycontin medication;
e. J. was cutting herself because she did not know what else to do;
f. J. confirmed that she told her friend through Facebook the previous night that she was going to kill herself after testifying in court because of what was going on at home;
g. J. used to cut herself when she lived in Tennessee and when she first arrived in Canada;
h. J. wishes there was no crying or screaming at home;
i. J. used to want to go to the hospital as she feels it is a peaceful place to go;
j. When J. told her mother that she wanted to kill herself, the mother said, “you’re not the only one with problems”;
k. J. showed the worker her left arm which had several horizontal red cuts across it and said she inflicted the cuts the night before with a razor; and
l. J. said she needed a break from her mother; she was worried that her mother would be angry at her for cutting herself.
[24] On June 6th the society worker also spoke to the mother privately at court who said she always thought that the society had supported her until now. When the society worker told the mother that the society was there to support J. the mother asked where her support was.
[25] The mother further reported that:
a. J. lies all of the time;
b. She had not allowed J. to speak to the victim support worker privately because J. was going to discuss the case which she was not allowed to;
c. J. was a spoiled brat;
d. The mother had no control in the home; she did not know how to disci- pline J. because she will ”flip her off”;
e. The mother had to pay a fine to the housing authority because of cat urine on the floors and the home was unkempt which she blamed on her daughters J. and D. saying their bedrooms were disgusting;
f. J. does drugs and has sex in the bushes at the school;
g. J.’s behaviour was taking a toll on the mother’s health; and
h. The mother knew that one day J. was going to do this to her.
[26] When the society worker asked the mother what she was planning to do to support J. after she testified that day, the mother replied that she did not know as it was something she had not planned.
[27] The mother stated that if J. had harmed herself, she would know about it. The society worker told the mother J. had showed her the razor blade cuts she made the night before. The mother was unaware J. has self- harmed.
[28] When the mother was told that J. would not be coming home with her after court, the mother repeated that she had not done anything wrong and J. was lying.
[29] J. told the society worker that when she went to give her mother a hug during the lunch break that day, her mother asked her why she was lying to the society.
EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO THE APPREHENSION
[30] The following day, J. arrived at court to continue her testimony and reported to her support worker that she had finally been able to sleep at the foster home where she had been placed the night before.
[31] The maternal grandmother contacted the society worker and reported that:
a. The mother needed some help as she was having a nervous breakdown; she was watched the mother deteriorate in the past 3 months;
b. The mother is often in a lot of pain and is an emotional wreck;
c. J. is a handful for the mother;
d. J. requires structure and boundaries that the mother cannot provide; and
e. She keeps her medication locked up but in June she noticed that she was missing 36 of her oxycontin pills and believes the mother took them and has also taken them in the past.
[32] The foster mother reported that J. was polite and well-mannered but worried about her mother a lot and was worried about her mother’s response to everything. J. told the foster mother that the foster home was too quiet and she was use to more noise at her mother’s home.
[33] Several days later, the foster mother reported to the society that J. had walked from school to her mother’s neighbourhood. J. then called the foster mother who picked her up. The foster mother reported that J. seemed happy that the foster mother picked her up. J. told her she had wanted to see her mother but then could not do it because she was unsure about what her mother would do or say. J. said that she knew her mother needed help, but her mother was okay and she wanted to return home to her mother.
[34] A visit was arranged between J. and her mother at the society’s office. A few hours before the visit, the mother called the society to advise that she needed a ride as she had gone to the maternal grandmother’s house in Georgetown. The society worker explained that the society could not arrange a ride and that it had been the mother’s choice to go to Georgetown. The mother arrived almost an hour late for the visit. J. had become very anxious as she was not sure if or when her mother would arrive. When the mother finally arrived, J. and her mother were affectionate to each other. But within minutes the mother began to pick at a bump on J.’s face and J. pushed her hand away and told her to leave her alone. The mother again tried to touch J.’s face at which point J. told her that she wanted her biggest problem to be the bumps on her face.
[35] J. was relocated to another foster home as her foster parents were leaving on a scheduled vacation. J. then left that foster home and attended at her mother’s home. When J. was picked up, she reported that the foster father had walked into her room and was looking as her while she was topless. As a result of this allegation, J. was not returned to the foster home and was placed in a group home.
[36] J.’s primary worker at the group home reported that J. had been doing well, she had not left the house without permission, that there were no signs of self-harm or suicidal ideation, that J. wanted to go home but that there was pressure on her because she constantly worried about her mother. The worker was told that J. was having sex with a 19 year old male and that the mother and maternal grandmother were aware of this.
[37] On July 25th the society worker attended for a plan of care meeting at the group home. The mother and J. were observed to be very affectionate with each other and were able to discuss the current situation calmly. J. wanted to go home and her mother wanted her home. There were discussions about what would need to happen before J. could return home including obtaining parenting counselling, having rules, structure and boundaries in the home and for J. to abide by those rules and the mother to be able to follow through with appropriate consequences. The mother acknowledged that the relationship between J. and her sister D. would need to be repaired. The society worker told J. and the mother that with increased access they would feel much more connected and more settled emotionally. It was the view of the society worker that the meeting ended positively. It was arranged that J. would visit the maternal grandmother at her home once a week for a full day and that the mother would attend at the group home up to 2 times a week for 2 hours at a time.
[38] On August 19th, the society worker contacted the group home to inquire about J. and the mother’s access visits. She was advised that the mother had only had 2 visits since the plan of care meeting on July 25th. The mother had told J. and the group home that she could not visit because she had pneumonia. The group home worker asked the mother to provide a letter from the doctor to confirm that she was clear any of contagion and able to visit again. J. was heard on the phone begging her mother to get a doctor’s note and was very upset that her mother was not visiting.
[39] On August 21st, the society worker contacted the mother to find out if she had obtained a doctor’s note but was told that the mother had only requested a note that day. The mother said she had been told by her doctor that she was only contagious for 3 days and that was 3 weeks ago. It had only been 2 weeks since she had seen J. The mother told the worker about being back on her heart medications and that she was feeling better. The mother advised that she was not connected with a counsellor or mental health provider but agreed it would be helpful. The mother told that worker that J. had seen her psychiatrist one time but there had been no follow up as J. did not want to attend. The mother also said that J. was not interested in attending Halton Trauma Centre.
[40] Since J. has been in care, the society also received several calls from the maternal grandmother with concerns about the mother’s physical and mental health, her ability to parent and the need for counselling for the whole family. The maternal grandmother also reported that J. was manipulative, that both J. and D. lied, that J. worried about her mother all of the time and that J. wanted to go home.
THE MOTHER’S POSITION AND PLAN OF CARE
[41] The mother’s affidavit focused on the fact that she had initially requested assistance from the society because she needed help after her lengthy separation from her daughters and that she needed help in obtaining heath cards, medication and social assistance.
[42] The mother deposed that J. is not in need of protection and the society should respect her wishes to come home. The mother also deposed that she had worked co-operatively with the prior social worker, Alexandra Healey, who never saw the need to separate J. from her mother and sister and it was only when the new worker, Bonnie Green, became involved with the family in September 2013 that the society felt the need to begin court proceedings.
[43] The mother emphasized several times that she was the one that reported to the police that J. was being sexually assaulted by a trusted family friend and that J. was under a great deal of stress because of the pending criminal trial when she called the society to report concerns about the mother.
[44] The mother deposed that what J. needed was counselling and guidance and the love, care and attention of her family and not to be torn away from her family.
[45] The mother deposed that despite her illnesses she has never abused, neglected or failed to care for her daughter and that if she is unable to care for J. then D. who is now 19 years old cares for her. Further, on the occasions when she has needed to go to the hospital she has ensured that the maternal grandmother is also present to help care for J.
[46] The mother denied that she had ever missed any counselling appointments for J. or missed taking her to court. The mother did not explain why she has not been seeing J. for her scheduled visits at the group home but instead stated that J. is not allowed to see her. The mother deposed that J. has been sneaking out from school to visit her and has done this three times and that J. calls her almost every day crying that she wants to come home.
[47] The mother deposes that as a result of the one call J. made to the society, the society decided to apprehend her but the society is ignoring the more than 50 telephone calls J. has made, the fact that she has run away five times from her foster home and J.’s repeated appeals to the society to send her home.
[48] It is the mother’s position that for the last year she worked co-operatively with the society and followed all of their recommendations and nothing has changed and therefore there was no need for the society to apprehend J.
[49] It is the mother’s plan that she would continue doing what she has done in the past and there is no need for any society intervention.
VIEWS AND PREFERENCES OF THE CHILD
[50] Mr. Moore, on behalf of J., confirmed that she wishes to go home. In response to a question from me as to whether or not J. wanted to go home because she felt she needed to care for her mother, he responded that there was no evidence that he was aware of that J. was a parentified child or felt responsible for the care for her mother.
[51] After submissions when I indicated that I was not prepared to return J. to her home, J. became very emotional and asked that she be allowed to speak. When I told her that her lawyer and her mother’s lawyer had both made it clear to me that she wanted to go home, nevertheless she still insisted that I hear from her personally.
[52] I then asked counsel for the mother and the society, the society worker, the mother and D. to leave the courtroom so that J. could speak to me in the presence of her own counsel. J. continued to be very emotional as she told me that she wanted to go home. When I asked J. if anything she told the society worker or her victim support worker was not true, she assured me that it was all true but she still wanted to go home. After I explained that although I understood she wanted to go home, my job was to make sure that if she went home she would be safe, she then asked me if she could have visits at her home as that would make her feel better about staying in foster care. I then explained that if her mother went to visits at the group home on a regular basis for a little while, then I would recommend that she could have visits outside of the group home. J. quickly calmed down and accepted this as a reasonable arrangement. I received J. consent to advise everyone about what she told me.
APPLICABLE LAW
[53] Temporary care and custody hearings are determined pursuant to s. 51 of the Child and family Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.C.11 (hereinafter referred to as “CFSA”) the relevant provisions are as follows:
Adjournments
- (1) The court shall not adjourn a hearing for more than thirty days,
(a) unless all the parties present and the person who will be caring for the child during the adjournment consent; or
(b) if the court is aware that a party who is not present at the hearing objects to the longer adjournment
51.(2) Custody during adjournment
Where a hearing is adjourned, the court shall make a temporary order for care and custody providing that the child,
(a) remain in or be returned to the care and custody of the person who had charge of the child immediately before intervention under this Part;
(b) remain in or be returned to the care and custody of the person referred to in clause (a), subject to the society’s supervision and on such reasonable terms and conditions as the court considers appropriate;
(c) be placed in the care and custody of a person other than the person referred to in clause (a), with the consent of that other person, subject to the society’s supervision and on such reasonable terms and conditions as the court considers appropriate; or
(d) remain or be placed in the care and custody of the society, but not be placed in,
(i) a place of secure custody as defined in Part IV (Youth Justice), or
(ii) a place of open temporary detention as defined in that Part that has not been designated as a place of safety.
51 (3) Criteria
The court shall not make an order under clause (2) (c) or (d) unless the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that there is a risk that the child is likely to suffer harm and that the child cannot be protected adequately by an order under clause (2) (a) or (b).
51 (3.1) Placement with relative, etc.
Before making a temporary order for care and custody under clause (2) (d), the court shall consider whether it is in the child’s best interests to make an order under clause (2) (c) to place the child in the care and custody of a person who is a relative of the child or a member of the child’s extended family or community.
- (3.2) Terms and conditions in order
A temporary order for care and custody of a child under clause (2) (b) or (c) may impose,
(a) reasonable terms and conditions relating to the child care and supervision;
(b) reasonable terms and conditions on the child’s parent, the person who will have care and custody of the child under the order, the child and any other person, other than a foster parent, who is putting forward a plan or who would participate in a plan for care and custody of or access to the child ; and
(c) reasonable terms and conditions on the society that will supervise the placement, but shall not require the society to provide financial assistance or to purchase any goods or services .
Application of s. 62
(4) Where the court makes an order under clause (2) (d), section 62 (parental consents) applies with necessary modifications.
Access
(5) An order made under clause (2) (c) or (d) may contain provisions regarding any person’s right of access to the child on such terms and conditions as the court considers appropriate.
Power to vary
(6) The court may at any time vary or terminate an order made under subsection (2).
Evidence on adjournments
(7) For the purpose of this section, the court may admit and act on evidence that the court considers credible and trustworthy in the circumstances.
[54] Subsection 51(3) creates a two-part test the Society has to meet:
a. The Society must establish, on credible and trustworthy evidence, reasonable grounds to believe there is a real possibility that if the child is returned to the mother, it is more probable than not that she will suffer harm.
b. As well, the Society must establish that the child cannot be adequately protected by terms and conditions of an interim supervision order to the parents.[^1]
[55] The test for the admissibility of evidence on an interim motion is “credible and trustworthy in the circumstances” [^2] in accordance with s. 51 (7) CFSA.
[56] Evidence that may not be credible and trustworthy when viewed in isolation might reach that threshold when examined in the context of other evidence. [^3]
[57] A court must choose the order that is the least disruptive placement consistent with adequate protection of the child in accordance with the primary principles of the legislation as set out in s.1 (2) CFSA. [^4]
[58] The basic options for a temporary order under s. 51(2) CFSA are :
a) Return the child without supervision.
b) Return the child with supervision.
c) Place the child with someone else, under supervision.
d) Place (or keep) the child in care of the Society.
[59] In this case there was no alternate placement proposed.
[60] Therefore, the onus is on the society on this temporary care and custody hearing to establish, on credible and trustworthy evidence, that there are reasonable and probable grounds to believe that there is a real possibility that if the child is returned to the mother, that it is more probable than not that she will suffer harm. Further, the onus is on the society to establish that the child cannot be adequately protected by terms of conditions of an interim supervision order.[^5]
ANALYSIS
[61] It is undisputed that J. who is 14 years old wishes to go home and that position has been advocated by her counsel.
[62] It is also undisputed that the mother wished J. to come home, that she loves J. and that she sincerely believes that she has properly cared for J. and that J. is not in need of protection.
[63] I find that J. cannot be adequately protected by an order returning her to her mother with or without supervision. The same issues and concerns that required the society to be involved with the mother since October 2011 still continue.
[64] Despite J. being in the mother’s care since October 2011 the mother has been unable to ensure that J. received consistent counselling to address the trauma she suffered while in the care of her father.
[65] The mother has been unable to ensure that J. received the consistent counselling she required to address the trauma she suffered since being in her mother’s care as a result of being sexually assaulted.
[66] The mother has not been able to ensure that J. received the ongoing support and assistance she required to assist her with the difficult task of testifying at the criminal trial.
[67] The mother has failed to ensure that J. attended school regularly or addressed the problems with bullying J. was experiencing at school.
[68] While in the mother’s care, J. has threatened to kill herself and has cut herself with a razor. The mother not only did not ensure J. received help for her numerous emotional problems but was not even aware that she was self-harming herself.
[69] The mother has not taken any steps to deal with the physical fights and arguments between J. and her sister D. Despite their inability to get along and despite J.’s emotional difficulties, the mother has left J. in the care of D. for several days at a time when she needed a rest or when she went to the hospital.
[70] The mother does not recognize or appreciate that J. has any mental health problems that require counselling and does not acknowledge that she has not been actively pursuing the treatment and counselling J. requires.
[71] Since J. has been in foster care the mother has not regularly and consistently exercised the access she has been offered thereby causing further emotional anxiety and harm to J.
[72] The mother takes no responsibility for any actions or failings on her part that required J. to be apprehended but instead blames either the society or J. who she submits made one call to the society while under stress that was the only reason that J. was apprehended. The mother does not address the many concerns expressed by J.’s teachers, school social worker, J.’s counsellor at the Halton Trauma Centre or J.’s victim support worker.
[73] Before J. can be returned to the care of the mother, the mother must recognize J.’s emotional needs and be in a position to ensure that she receives the treatment and counselling she requires. The mother must be able to put J.’s needs before her own needs and be able to manage her medical problems so that they do not interfere with her ability to meet J.’s many needs.
[74] The mother must be able to ensure that when J. is returned home that she is able to manage the conflict between J. and her sister D. and be able to ensure that there are no physical altercations between them and that J. is properly supervised.
[75] J. must also understand that she needs to abide by rules such as attending school regularly, attending counselling regularly and not acting out in ways that are dangerous to her.
[76] As I indicated to J. if her mother is able to attend regularly for visits at the group home for several weeks then access should be accommodated outside of the society’s office for a full day at least once a week.
[77] There will therefore be a temporary order that:
a. The child J., born […], 1998 shall remain in the care and custody of the society.
b. Access shall be at the discretion of the society and supervised in the discretion of the society but at a minimum of one day at week at the home of the maternal grandmother and at a minimum of twice a week at the group home for the mother. If the mother exercises access consistently for several weeks, J. should be permitted to exercise day access at the mother’s home.
Released: October 3, 2013
Signed: “Justice Roselyn Zisman”
[^1]: Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa-Carlton v. T. 2000 CanLII 21157 (ON SC), [2000] O.J. No. 2273 (S.C.J.)
[^2]: Catholic Children’s Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto v. A.D. (1994), 1993 CanLII 6985 (ON SC), 1 R.F.L. (4th) 268 (Ont. Ct. Gen. Div.)
[^3]: Family and Children’s Service of the Region of Waterloo v. R.O. [2006] O.J. No. 969 (O.C.J.)
[^4]: Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton v. B.D. and F.T.M. 2012 ONSC (S.C.J.)
[^5]: Children’s Aid Society of Ottawa-Carleton v. T. 2000 CanLII 21157 (ON SC), [2000] O.J. No. 2273 (S.C.J.)