top of page

CAS v. M.J. and A.N., 2019 ONSC 4873
Date: September 25, 2019

Overview

The Children’s Aid Society (CAS) of the Regional Municipality of Waterloo filed a motion seeking a finding that the child, H.J., born in 2018, is in need of protection under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (CYFSA). CAS sought an order for H.J. to be placed in extended society care without access to the parents.

Background Facts

  • H.J. has been in CAS care since birth.

  • M.J. has a history of unstable relationships, domestic violence, drug use, and non-compliance with CAS directives.

  • A.N. has had no contact with H.J. and has a prior history with child protection services.

  • M.J. has five other children, none of whom are in her care.

  • CAS has proposed adoption by a family who has already adopted four of M.J.'s other children.

  • M.J. opposed the motion, arguing that she had secured stable housing, was not currently using illegal drugs, and had a strong bond with H.J.

Legal Framework

The case was decided under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (CYFSA), which governs child protection proceedings in Ontario. The following legal principles were applied:

  • Section 74(2)(b-i) CYFSA: Determines when a child is in need of protection.

  • Section 74(3) CYFSA: Outlines factors for determining the best interests of the child, including stability, emotional well-being, and permanency planning.

  • Sections 101 and 102 CYFSA: Provide guidelines for placement decisions, emphasizing the least disruptive alternative while ensuring child safety.

  • Summary Judgment (Rule 16, Family Law Rules): Used to determine if a full trial is necessary when there is no genuine issue requiring a trial.

  • Access Considerations (Sections 105(5) and (6) CYFSA): The court must determine if access is in the child’s best interests and whether it would impact future adoption prospects.

Legal Analysis

  • Summary Judgment: The court applied the test for summary judgment in child protection cases, considering whether a full trial was necessary.

  • Best Interests of the Child: The court analyzed factors under section 74(3) of CYFSA, including stability, risk of harm, and permanency planning.

  • Parent's Conduct: The court found that M.J. had not demonstrated sufficient progress in addressing concerns about her ability to parent safely.

Decision

The court granted CAS’s motion for summary judgment, ordering that:

  1. H.J. be placed in extended society care under CAS.

  2. A focused hearing be conducted to determine whether M.J. should have access to H.J.

Key Findings

  • M.J. failed to make meaningful progress in improving her circumstances since the removal of her other children.

  • Her history of domestic violence, drug use, and non-compliance with CAS raised significant concerns.

  • The child required stability and permanency, which adoption could provide.

  • The court determined that proceeding summarily was in H.J.'s best interests, rather than prolonging the legal process.

Conclusion

The court concluded that H.J. should remain in extended society care and that a separate hearing would determine the issue of access. The decision emphasized the need for stability and safety in the child's life, prioritizing their best interests over parental claims.

 

Family & Children’s Services of St. Thomas and Elgin v. M.M. (2019 ONSC 4649)

Date: August 21, 2019
Background

The Family & Children’s Services of St. Thomas and Elgin (the "Society") initiated a Child Protection Application concerning the child, T.E.L., born in 2015. The case involved the child's parents, M.M. (mother) and J.L. (father). The Society filed a motion for summary judgment seeking a declaration that the child was in need of protection and requesting an order for extended society care.

Legal Issues

  1. Whether the child, T.E.L., was in need of protection under the Child, Youth and Family Services Act, 2017 (CYFSA).

  2. Whether the child should be placed in extended society care.

  3. Whether the mother and father should have access to the child.

Findings and Reasoning

1. Child in Need of Protection:

The Court found that the child was in need of protection under subclauses 74(2)(b)(i) and (ii) and clause 74(2)(h) of the CYFSA, due to:

  • The mother’s history of substance abuse, including cocaine and crystal meth use, which impaired her ability to parent.

  • Instances where the mother left the child unattended and maintained an unsafe home environment.

  • The father’s unresolved anger management issues and failure to engage with necessary support services.

  • Exposure of the child to domestic conflict and instability.

2. Placement in Extended Society Care:

The Court determined that:

  • The mother had not demonstrated sustained stability to provide adequate care for the child.

  • The father had not put forward a viable plan to assume care for the child.

  • The child had been in foster care since February 2018, where he had established strong attachments and was thriving.

  • No suitable family or community placements were available.

Based on these factors, the Court concluded that placing the child in extended society care was the least disruptive and most protective option.

3. Parental Access:

  • Mother: The Court granted the mother access at the Society’s discretion, contingent on her sobriety.

  • Father: The Court determined that a trial was necessary to assess whether access with the father would be in the child’s best interests, given both positive and negative observations regarding his interactions with the child.

Final Order

  1. The child, T.E.L., was found to be in need of protection.

  2. The child was placed in extended society care.

  3. The mother was granted supervised access, subject to her sobriety and the Society’s discretion.

  4. A trial was ordered to determine the father’s access rights.

Conclusion

The Court ruled in favor of the Society’s motion for summary judgment, citing the ongoing instability of both parents and the need for a stable environment for the child. The ruling emphasized the importance of prioritizing the child's best interests over parental aspirations, ensuring continuity of care in a safe and nurturing setting.

bottom of page