SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
PETERBOROUGH COURT FILE NO.: FC-12-567
DATE: 20140830
RE: Kevin Grosse, Applicant
AND:
Sue Ann Taylor, Respondent
BEFORE: THE HON. MR. JUSTICE P.H. HOWDEN
COUNSEL:
A. Anderson, Counsel for the Applicant
C. Roncossek, Counsel for the Respondent
HEARD: August 29, 2014
ENDORSEMENT
(Amended as to adjourned date September 12, 2014, not 26,
and date of Ingram J.’s Order in first line)
1On August 6, 2014, Ingram J. ordered on consent that disclosure was to be made regarding the issues between these parties and the child Angelina Taylor, born August 29, 2005. A further order was made, not on consent, that the child was to be returned to the care of her mother Ms. Taylor on August 29, 2014. This matter came before me in the afternoon of August 29 on the motion of Mr. Grosse requesting that the prior order be altered and that the child be continued in the temporary care of the father. It also requests that any access by the mother be supervised. Lastly it requested that the Office of the Children’s Lawyer be appointed to do a custodial/access assessment.
2Ms. Roncossek had to request an adjournment of the matter because of a prior commitment at 3:00 p.m. After hearing counsel, I ordered the appointment of the OCL on consent. I also allowed the adjournment, continued the temporary custody of the child with Mr. Grosse until today at 6:00 p.m., amended Ingram J.’s order to that effect and reserved my decision on care or control pending the adjourned date of September 26 to allow time to properly review the newly disclosed material now filed.
3Mr. Anderson states that the situation is urgent and the child must now be continued in Mr. Grosse’s custody at least temporarily. Ms. Roncossek stated that there is no urgency, that the CAS was not contemplating apprehension of the child and that the order of Ingram J. for return of the child to the mother’s care and control should be allowed to occur.
4I have reviewed the material. It contains accounts of behaviour by both parents in and around the end of May and early June that both should not be proud of. There is evidence that when Ms. Taylor was with Mr. Grosse, it was an abusive relationship. He exhibited bad judgment and an n anger that was inappropriate when he was at the Kinark Centre in May. Since then however, there is evidence from the K-H CAS in a letter dated August 11, 2014 that states the following: In addition to finding that concerns over risk of emotional harm to the child from the conflict between Ms. Taylor and Mr. Grosse are verified, the Society has verified risk of emotional harm to Angelina by Ms. Taylor’s uncertain attitude toward custodial responsibility by acknowledging her other priorities sometimes made her feel she did not want to care for the child day to day; on a number of occasions, Ms. Taylor has told the CAS personnel she was not able or willing to care for her, indicating a very changeable mindset over her parenting responsibilities - this is confirmed by statements she has made to the Peterborough police; and further the CAS has verified risk of harm to Angelina due to Ms. Taylor’s mental health and coping abilities. She has requested numerous breaks in parenting duties, and she has told the child to say she wants to stay with her or she will kill her father and grandmother. Angelina confirmed to the worker that Ms. Taylor often yells at her, that she is hungry when she is with her mother, and that she wants to stay with her father.
5Unlike the apparent tumult around Ms. Taylor’s changing attitudes toward caring for the child, I see evidence over the last several months from the CAS of a more peaceful, stabilized situation for the child with her father.
6Angelina has been with her father for the last several months. In my view based on the evidence before me, it is in the child’s best interests to remain now with her father until further order by this court pending the adjourned date.
7It is ordered that the applicant father continue to have the sole care and control of Angelina for a temporary time until September 12, 2014 when this matter comes before the court again. The order of August 6, 2014, para. 5 is hereby amended to provide that Angelina shall continue in the sole care and control of the applicant father and shall not be returned to the mother’s care on August 29 or 30, 2014. The mother shall have supervised access only at an accredited supervised access centre or may have access on the written consent of the applicant father. These orders are only in force until September 12, 2014 to which date at 9:30 a.m. this matter is adjourned.
HOWDEN J.
Date: August 30, 2014