Thomas Richard Milne

The Dnaagdawenmag Binnoojiiyag Child & Family Services (Agency) brought a motion for summary judgment seeking final orders to place four children in the care of their adult sibling under Agency supervision and to regulate parental access.

The parents, G.K. and M.S., opposed the motion, while B[...] First Nation supported the Agency.

The court found that the children remained in need of protection due to the parents' unaddressed issues (substance use, domestic violence, mental health) and lack of a realistic plan.

The court granted the Agency's motion, finding it in the children's best interests to be placed with their adult sibling, Sk.K., in Calgary, Alberta, under a six-month supervision order, with Agency-discretionary parental access.

The Dnaagdawenmag Binnoojiiyag Child and Family Services (DBCFS), the Respondent Mother, and the Respondent Father each brought motions to vary a temporary supervision order concerning the child, L.T.C., following the Mother's discharge from a mothering house due to dishonesty and a positive drug test.

The court found a material change in circumstances.

While the Agency and Mother sought to continue the Mother's primary care under supervision, the Father sought equal shared care.

The court, applying the legal tests for varying temporary placement orders, found the Father's plan for shared care to be more comprehensive and in the child's best interests, providing greater accountability for both parents and opportunities for the Agency to assess parenting capacity.

The court ordered a week-about shared care arrangement under the supervision of the Agency and both maternal and paternal grandmothers.

The applicant child protection agency apprehended two young children.

The maternal grandmother, K.D.-M., sought to be added as a respondent and for the children to be placed in her care.

The agency and the children's mother opposed this, advocating for agency care with a plan to return the children to the mother, or placement with the father.

The court found that the agency improperly failed to name the maternal grandmother as a party, as she qualified as a "parent" under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act due to a Voluntary Service Agreement.

The court also determined that placing the children with the maternal grandmother, subject to supervision terms, was appropriate, as the risk of harm could be mitigated.

The maternal grandmother's motion was granted, and the children were ordered to be returned to her care.