Self-represented (J.B.)

The Simcoe Muskoka Child, Youth and Family Services Society brought a motion for temporary care of the infant child, G., to be placed with kin caregivers, and for access to the mother, C.B., to be at the Society's discretion.

The mother opposed, seeking return of the child or supervised access by her adult daughter.

The court granted temporary care to the kin caregivers, finding a risk of harm due to the mother's unaddressed mental health issues and non-cooperation with the Society.

The court also determined that supervised access by the Society was not feasible during the COVID-19 pandemic, and that the mother's proposed supervisor was inappropriate.

Access for the infant was therefore suspended, with virtual access for older siblings and a review clause for future face-to-face visits.

A child protection proceeding under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 involving a child apprehended at age nine from her mother's care.

The court found the child in need of protection under sections 74(2)(b)(i) and 74(2)(b)(ii) of the CYFSA based on risk of physical harm resulting from the mother's failure to adequately care for, provide for, supervise or protect the child, and a pattern of neglect.

The risk arose from the mother's substance abuse, involvement in domestic violence relationships, and poor choices in male partners.

The court rejected the society's other grounds for finding (actual physical harm, emotional harm, and risk of emotional harm).

For disposition, the court made a deemed custody order under section 102(1) of the CYFSA in favour of the maternal grandparents, with whom the child had been residing.

The court made an access order permitting the child to initiate contact with her mother, with the child controlling the terms and conditions of visits.

No access order was made for the stepfather.

The Office of the Children's Lawyer brought a motion to rescind its appointment as legal representative for a medically fragile infant subject to a child protection proceeding and to remove its assigned counsel.

The child, born with serious cardiac defects, was in the care of the Society and subsequently suffered a life-threatening infection.

A dispute arose between the child's mother and the hospital regarding medical treatment, including a potential do-not-resuscitate order.

The court dismissed the OCL's motion, finding that legal representation remained desirable to protect the child's interests despite the child's inability to provide instructions.

The court awarded costs against the OCL for failing to properly re-evaluate its position in light of changed circumstances.