overview of child protection proceedings in saskatchewan...
TRANSCRIPT
OVERVIEW OF CHILD PROTECTION PROCEEDINGS IN SASKATCHEWAN AND THE
AMENDMENTS FOR KINSHIP CARE
These materials were prepared by Lori Sandstorm-Smith, of Saskatchewan Justice Saskatoon Saskatchewan for the Saskatchewan Legal Education Society Inc. seminar, Family Law Update; September
2004.
OVERVIEW OF CHILD PROTECTION PROCEEDINGS IN SASKATCHEWAN
) AND THE AMENDMENTS FOR KINSHIP CARE
INTRODUCTION
Child protection law is a particularly challenging area of practice, due to the often
disturbing nature of the application itself, the emotional distress experienced by the
parent/client, the extremely tight time frames prescribed for applications, and the highly
specialized procedural rules.
I. The nature of the application
Children are the most vulnerable members of society. When they are victimized
) by the very people who are supposed to protect them, the state will intervene. In this
province, there have been several highly publicized reports of parents who have exposed
children to repeated beatings, sexual victimization, abandonment and neglect. Most child
abuse cases, however, are never reported by the media. Lawyers, even those who are
experienced in family law, may be shocked by the incidence and severity of child abuse.
In Saskatoon alone, 8 new families are brought before the court each week - families
where the children have suffered harm while in parental care. And these represent only a
small portion of at risk families; most receive services andlor residential care for their
children on a voluntary basis, never entering the court process.
< )
2
ii, Emotional distress
Much has been written about the emotional distress parents experience in child
custody and access disputes. In child protection, this distress can be magnified tenfold.
Parents may be facing loss of their children forever to permanent wardship and
subsequent adoption, and many may also be facing criminal charges for abuse. For some
parents, their own experience in foster care may create unimaginable fear for the well
being of their own child. Many of these parents may lack effective coping mechanisms,
making them less able to deal with the stress of intervention and court.
As Madam Justice Heather Katarynych noted': 'For most parents swept intQ,a
child protection investigation and consequent court proceeding, the promptness of the
first appearance in this post apprehension hearing hits with a particular force .... They are
before the court before many have had any real opportunity to attempt to come to terms
with the apprehension itself and whatever circumstances precipitated it'.
iii. Time Constraints
The Child and Family Services Act provides a comprehensive code for child
protection in Saskatchewan. This legislation as well as pronouncements from the
Supreme Court require that there be prompt determination of the issues. In C.M. v.
Catholic Children's Aid Society of Metropolitan Toronto and Official Guardian, 2
L'Heureux-Dube J. stated at 349 (R.F.L.):
As I stated earlier, time is of the essence in proceedings concerning the welfare of children. Every effort should be made to accelerate hearings of these matters so
I 'Post Apprehension Hearings In a Child Protection Case: A Bit About Fairness, Promptness and the Assessment of Interim Risk', an unpublished paper prepared for the National Judicial Institute, 2001. 2 1994) 2 S.C.R. 165, (1994) 2 R.F.L. (4") 313
)
(
)
)
)
)
3
as to minimize any prejudice to all parties and to avoid that a certain state of affairs occurs.
Nicholas Bala3, in discussing the Supreme Court's decision in Winnipeg Child and
Family Services v. W. (K.L.J notes 'there is no advantage to a child from delays in the
court system that frustrate the right of parents and the interest of children to obtain a
timely hearing about the child's future. Indeed, children often suffer as their cases 'drift'
through the court system'.
The Court of Queen's Bench in Saskatchewan has directed that an application
following apprehension of the child shall be heard in Chambers within two weeks of the
date of apprehension. Applications without apprehension and applications to extend
existing orders must be heard within 30 days. Adjournments, where necessary. are
generally short to avoid adversely impacting the child through further delay. The Child
and Family Services Act, section 33, requires that the court in most instances, determine
whether a child is in need of protection and make the appropriate disposition order within
60 days of the day on which the protection hearing commences.
iv. Specialized procedures
Many family law practitioners are not familiar with the highly specialized rules
adopted in child protection proceedings. This can combine with other factors to make the
practice of child protection law particularly challenging.
In Saskatchewan, the number of applications proceeding under The Child and
Family Services Act appears to be increasing steadily, and in other jurisdictions in
Canada, this increase has placed a heavy burden on the court system. The nature and
4
complexity of the applications are also changing, as professionals become more adept at
identifying indices and consequences of abuse, and expert assessments become more
critical to resolution. Casework itself is also changing, to reflect child welfare redesign,
and the importance of family preservation, bringing new elements into the system. As a
result, child protection law relies upon a specialized set of procedural rules that must
continually evolve.
Following the 1999 Supreme Court of Canada decision in New Brunswick v. G.
(J.l. compliance with procedural rules appears to have increasing importance. Child
protection proceedings are now recognized as posing a fundamental threat to the 'security
of the person' of parents and their children, and must therefore be conducted in
accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
To alleviate some of the challenges in child protection law, the current practices
in child protection proceedings in Saskatchewan will be reviewed in these materials. with
particular emphasis on recent developments, alternative methods of resolving disputes
and the new amendments to The Child and Family Services Act. These amendments
were passed by the legislature in June, 2003, and are waiting proclamation,
AGENCIES PROVIDING CHILD PROTECTION SERVICES
Child protection proceedings in Saskatchewan are governed by The Child and
Family Services Act S.S. 1989-90 c C-7,2 This Act and its regulations form a
comprehensive code dealing with the care and custody of children deemed to be at risk of
harm by parental act or omission.
1 The Charter of Rights and Child Welfare', an unpublished paper for the National Judicial Institute, 2002 conference at 32
)
)
(
)
)
5
The Department of Community Resources and Employment is responsible for the
provision of child protection services in Saskatchewan under this Act. Pursuant to section
61 of The Child and Family Services Act, the Minister has entered into agreements
empowering First Nation Child and Family Services Agencies to provide services to
members residing on reserve, In Saskatchewan, there are 17 agencies presently
operational:
• Agency Chiefs Child and Family Services providing services to Big River. Pelican
Lake and Witchekan Lake
• Ahtahkakoop Child and Family Services Inc. providing services to Ahtahkakoop
• Athabaska Denesuline Child and Family Services providing services to Black Lake,
Fond du Lac and Hatchet Lake
•
•
•
Battleford Tribal Council for Little Pine, Lucky Man, Mosquito, Poundmaker and
Sweetgrass
Kanaweyihimitowin Child and Family Services Inc. for Beardy's and Okemasis
Kanaweyirnik Child and Family Services providing services to Moosomin, Red
Pheasant, Saulteaux and Thunderchild
• Lac La Ronge Child and Family Services for Lac La Ronge
• Meadow Lake Tribal Council for Birch Narrows (Tumor Lake), Buffalo River, Canoe
Lake, Clearwater River, English River, Flying Dust, Island Lake, Makwa
Sahgaiehcan and Waterhen Lake
• Montreal Lake Cree Nation for Montreal Lake
\ ) • (1999) S.C.J. 47
6
• Nicapanak Centre Child and Family Services Inc, for Shoal Lake, Red Earth and
Cumberland House
• Onion Lake Family Services Inc for Onion Lake
• Peter Ballantyne Child and Family Services Inc. for Peter Ballantyne, including
Southend, Deschambeault, Pelican Narrows and Sandy Bay
• Qu' AppeUe Child and Family Services for Muscowpetung. Nekaneet. Pasqua,
Standing Buffalo, Wood Mountain and Carry the Kettle
• Saskatoon Tribal Council for Kinistin, Mistawasis, Muskeg Lake, Muskoday, One
Arrow, Whitecap Dakota/Sioux, and Yellowquill
• Sturgeon Lake First NationIWahpeton Dakota Nation Nehiyaw Awasis Siceca
Cistinnna Child and Family Services Inc. for Sturgeon Lake and Wahpeton
• Touchwood Child and Family Services providing services to Day Star, Fishing Lake,
Gordon, Kawacatoose and Muscowekwan
• Yorkton Tribal Council Child and Family Services for Cote, Cowessess,
Kahkewistahaw, Keeseekoose, Key, Ochapowace, Ocean Man, Sakimay, Pheasant
Rump, White Bear, Little Black Bear, Peepeekisis and Starblanket.
In addition to these 17 agencies, there are four bands not presently affiliated with
a First Nation Child and Family Services Agency. These communities can be
contacted either through their band office, or through the Department of Community
Resources and Employment: Piapot (Regina DCRE), Okanese (Ft. Qu' Appelle
DCRE), James Smith (Melfort DCRE) and Joseph Bighead (Meadow Lake DCRE).
)
)
)
)
)
)
7
OVERVIEW OF CHILD PROTECTION PROCEEDINGS
The following provides a brief overview of the legislation and procedures adopted in
child protection applications before the Court of Queen's Bench (Family Law Division).
Applications in Provincial Court appear less dependent upon affidavit evidence, but do
follow many of the same guidelines. In preparing this overview, special attention has
been given to include new practices and to reference the new amendments. A flowchart
is included at the end of these materials that may provide some assistance to those
unfamiliar with the process.
Perhaps the most significant developments overall in child protection proceedings in
Saskatchewan relate to (1) the importance and recognition given to culture~ and (2) the
ability to achieve healthy resolutions, and to do so expeditiously.
In approximately one third of all applications in Saskatoon, orders are granted at the
time of the first appearance. A variety of alternative dispute resolution methods have
been employed to reach agreement without the necessity of trial (including mediation,
case conferences, circles and the Opikinawasowin). In the past two years, no application
has proceeded to a contested hearing.
With Indian and Metis families, culture is of significant importance in both child
welfare practice and the court process itself. The child's band is notified through the
First Nation agency on every application, even though the legislation only requires this
where longterm or permanent wardship is recommended. Case conferences and circles
typically include representatives from the communities, and every effort is made to
maintain a positive cultural connection for the child.
8
1. 'Child'
(J defined in s, 2(1)(d) as a person actually or apparently under the age of 16 years,
except where a contrary intention is expressed.
o The legislation contains specific authority for youth 16 or 17 years of age to be
found in need of protection [see s. 18].
[;) The case law suggests that the child must be under the requisite age at the time of
application.
a Unlike other jurisdictions in Canada. the child in Saskatchewan is not considered
a party to the proceeding, but in some situations, the child has a right to be heard
and to be interviewed by the court.
o There is no express provision in the legislation for counsel to be appointed for
children, however, this has occurred where the court is not satisfied the child
protection agency can adequately represent the interests of the child.
Q In general, the rules of evidence are relaxed by the legislation to enable evidence
of the child to be admitted by alternative means, and children do not typically
testify at child protection proceedings.
2. 'Parent'
a defined broadly in s, 2(1)(n) to include the biological parent, the step-parent or
caregiver with whom the child resides, and any persons who have had custody of
the child by an order or agreement.
)
)
)
)
9
Q For the purposes of child protection proceedings, the biological father of the child
is a party. whether or not he is identified on the registration of live birth or meets
the definition of birth father in custody legislation.
a The biological parents in child protection proceedings have the same standing
under the legislation, and it is their safety and the quality of their relationship with
the child that becomes the focus of the proceeding.
o There is no specific provision in The Child and Family Services Act for counsel to
be appointed for an indigent parent - this is a process described in G. (]). and
discussed more fully under "right to counsel" below.
3, 'Duty to report'
o all child protection legislation in Canada contains comparable duties to report
child abuse. Ontario's appears to be the most stringent, denying even solicitor
client privilege.
D Section 12 of the Child and Family Services Act provides that every person who
has reasonable grounds to believe a child is in need of protection shall report the
information to an officer [child protection worker] or a peace officer.
o Breach of this duty, under section 81(2)(e) is an offence and liable on summary
conviction to a fine of not more than $25,000 andlor imprisonment for a term of
not more than 24 months.
4. 'Best Interests'
D factors are enumerated in section 4.
10
o Common law suggests that the superior court's parens patriae jurisdiction can
enlarge these factors where doing so is in the child's best interests,
o The factors presently include where practicable, the child's wishes~ the child's
emotional, physical, psychological, cultural and spiritual needs; the quality of the
relationships the child has; the child's level of development; plans of care; the
home environment proposed; the importance of continuity of care and the effect
on the child of delay in reaching a decision.
a Other provisions in the legislation prescribe the cumulative time a child may
spend in care before permanency planning must oceui' (24 months). It is not
deemed to be in the best interests of the child to languish in foster care.
5. 'In need of protection'
o is defined in section 11 of the Act.
o A child is in need of protective intervention where the child has suffered or is
likely to suffer physical harm or serious impairment of mental or emotional
functioning; where the child is at risk of harmful interaction for a sexual purpose;
where essential medical treatment is not provided; where the child's development
is being seriously impaired; and where the child is suffering from exposure to
domestic violence and/or severe domestic disharmony.
o Section 11(b) also identifies a child to be in need of protection where there is no
adult person able and willing to provide for the child.
a Under section 11(c), state intervention can occur where the child is under the age
of 12 years and acting out in the community.
)
)
)
)
)
11
o Section 11 was amended in 1999 to expressly provide that the grounds apply to
children victimized by prostitution.
o The relevant date for determination of whether a child is in need of protection is
likely the time of the child I s apprehension or commencement of the application.
6. Forum
o in Saskatchewan, the Court of Queen's Bench has exclusive jurisdiction for child
protection proceedings in Saskatoon, Regina and Prince Albert. In all other
centres, this jurisdiction is concurrent with the Provincial Court of Saskatchewan.
o There are certain advantages for proceedings occurring in a superior court, both
procedurally and substantively. Pretrial conferencing is readily available to assist
in achieving resolutions without trial, and superior courts have inherent powers
under the doctrine of parens patriae.
o Under The Child and Family Services Act, an application for a protection hearing
can be brought by an officer in.any jurisdiction in the province. It need not be
brought in the area where the child is habitually resident.
7. 'Apprehensions'
o are prescribed in sections 17 and 18 of the Act.
o The constitutional validity of warrantless apprehensions was upheld by the
Supreme Court of Canada in Winnipeg Child and Family Services v. W.(K.L.), but
the court held that section 7 of the Charter requires that the apprehension only be
justified where there is a 'situation of harm or a risk of serious harm to the child.!'
12
1:1 There must be a post-apprehension judicial hearing within a reasonably short time
period, and in Saskatchewan, a directive from the Chief Justice of the Court of
Queen's Bench requires this hearing to occur within 14 days.
1:1 When a child has been placed on apprehended status, the Minister [section 52] has
all the rights and responsibilities of the parent except with respect to adoption
proceedings,
CI The officer has authority to determine issues of access [section 17(7)].
8. ~Bifurcated proceedings'
o child protection proceedings tend to follow the criminal model of finding of guilt,
followed by sentencing.
1:1 Bifurcated proceedings require the court to first find the child to be in need of
protection [the adjudication stage], and then determine the appropriate order
[disposition stage], after considering the child's best interests.
o In Saskatchewan, this is a conceptual distinction.
9. 'Parent's right to counsel'
(J predecessor legislation (The Family Services Act) allowed for the Minister to
provide legal counsel for parents where necessary. This discretion was
discontinued in 1992, and the Act is now silent with respect to a parent's right to
counsel.
I
)
)
)
)
13
o Many of the parents in child protection proceedings are indigent, and the
Saskatchewan Legal Aid Commission provides representation in approximately
60% of child protection applications,
o On September 10, 1999, in New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community
Services) v. G. (J), the Supreme Court determined that state removal of a child
from parental custody interferes with the psychological integrity of the parent,
intrudes into a private sphere and disrupts family life, thereby restricting the
parent's right to security of the person.
D To ensure a fair hearing, the court may now order state funded counsel for the
parent where Legal Aid is unable or unwilling to act.
o G. (J,J set out the appropriate procedures to follow to enable a court appointment
of counsel to occur. Firstly, Legal Aid must have been denied, and an appeal of
this denial unsuccessful. The procedure then is similar to that used in criminal
proceedings.
a The parents will need to indicate to the court their desire for legal representation
and an inability to afford counsel. Typically, the parent will file a completed
financial statement with the court, and notify Court Services of their intention to
seek state funded legal representation.
a The court must be satisfied the parent is really unable to afford representation, and
parents with a 'reasonable income [approximately $45,000 - 55,000 gross joint
incomes] who with a reworking of their priorities should be able to retain
counsel,' are not indigent and not entitled to a court order for representation5•
) sF. & c.s. oJGuelph and Wellington City v. K.F. [2001] OJ .. 4548 (Ont. Ct. J.) per Caspers J.
14
a Where the court assesses the parent as indigent, the court will then assess the
seriousness of the interests at stake, the complexity of the proceedings and the
ability of the parent to act on their own behalf.
o Representations may be made by Court Services. There is not presumed to be a
right to counsel of choke,
D The court has acknowledged that short term wardships increase the likelihood of
permanency planning in the future, and 'seriousness of the interests at stake' has
included even brief placements of the child out of parental care.
D There is an argument that persons who satisfy the court they have a close
connection to the child, including foster parents who have cared for the,child for a
lengthy period of time, may be 'psychological parents', and also be entitled to
seek state funded legal representation, using the same procedures as the biological
or custodial parent.
10. 'Child's right to counsel'
o The Supreme Court of Canada in G (l.) recognized that children may have their
own constitutional right to 'liberty and security of the person' which may be
affected by the child protection process.
o Children with capacity - and in some cases, children without capacity, have
occasionally been granted state funded legal representation, despite the difficulties
for counsel in formulating a position.
)
)
)
)
\ )
15
o In Saskatchewan, appointment of counsel for children in child protection
proceedings appears to occur only where the court is not convinced the agency is
able to act in the child's best interests.
11. 'Publication bans'
o child protection legislation across the country contain, to varying degrees,
provision to exclude the media and to prevent publication of information that
would identify the child.
o In Saskatchewan, the protection hearing may be held in camera [so 26(1)], and the
court may prohibit publication of a report of a protection hearing or any part of
the protection hearing where deemed to be in the best interests of the child.
o Nicholas Bala notes at 39 that 'There is no doubt that the restrictions on the
. publication of identifying information about a child involved in child welfare can
be constitutionally justified as a valid restriction on freedom of the press. The
concern about the protection of the privacy and emotional health of children who
may have been abused, neglected or abandoned by their parents from the intrusive
effects of identifying publicity are matters of 'superordinate importance,6
12. 'persons of sufficient interest'
o section 23 of The Child and Family Services Act allows for a member of the
child's extended family, the Chief of the child's band, or any other person who
6 A.H. v. P.e. [2002] B.C.J. 589 [B.C. Provo Ct.]'.
16
has a close connection to the child to be recognized as a party to the child
protection proceedings.
o In most circumstances, an undisputed claim of familial proximity is enough to
seek the designation. Where the relationship is less certain or opposed, the court
may request evidence of the nature and quality of the relationship be filed.
o Foster parents-who can establish that their relationship to the child exceeds that of
a typical foster situation have successfully been recognized as persons of
sufficient interest in proceedings in Saskatchewan.
o Once recognized, the person of sufficient interest may seek to have the child
placed in their custody under section 37 of the Act.
13. 'homestudies and protection assessments'
o where a person of sufficient interest or a non~custodial parent is seeking to have
the child placed into their custody, the court will request that a homestudy on the
person of sufficient interest be filed, or a protection assessment on the parent.
a 'Typically, these assessments are completed by the officer and the proposed
caregiver, and include child welfare, criminal records and reference check.
14. 'parenting assessments'
a under section 32 of the Act, the court may order a psychiatric, psychological or
other assessment on the child, a person of sufficient interest or the parent to assist
the court in determining disposition.
)
)
)
17
o Most common are parenting assessments completed by a registered psychologist
chosen by the parent. These assessments help identify services that can be
provided to assist in family reintegration.
o Costs for the assessment may be borne .by the agency. and assessments may take
several months to complete, depending upon the depth of the assessment.
15. 'Evidence'
o The Child and Family Services Act [so 28] allows the court in its discretion to
admit evidence by affidavit or any other means authorized by The Queen's Bench
Rules for the taking of evidence.
o The court may admit hearsay evidence where credible and trustworthy and where
it is not in the best interests for the child to testify.
o Under section 29 of the Act, the child may be interviewed by the court where this
) is assessed to be in the child's best interests.
o The law of evidence in initial child protection proceedings has long recognized
the need for expedition, the need to admit all relevant evidence, and the need to
preserve the parent's relationships with family members and therapists as much as
possible.
o At the preliminary stage (Chambers), the agency will typically prepare an
affidavit and court summary (filed for the first appearance), with the summary
detailing the parent's involvement with child protection services and the affidavit
describing the circumstances resulting in the current application.
o This information should include both parenting accomplishments/strengths and
protection concerns/challenges.
i )
"
18
q The documents should establish the cumulative time the child has already spent in
the agency's care, and the quality of the relationship between the child and
significant others.
o Referrals may not be identified in the affidavit and court summary if anonymity is
requested, Of if necessary to prevent further damage to the parent's relationship
with family and community supports, children in the home and professionals. If
children are to be reintegrated to parental care, these supports are often crucial.
o The social worker's affidavit must also contain the officer's recommendation, or
plan of care for the child.
o Typically. if the parent is opposed to this plan of care, the parent will not respond
through affidavit, but request the matter in the Court of Queen's Bench proceed to
pretrial conference.
CJ If no agreement can be reached at the pretrial conference, the matter will proceed
to trial.
CJ A greater reliance upon the more formalized rules of evidence is expected when
the application proceeds to trial or hearing, and evidence is typically given viva
void. The child, however, is still not normally called to testify, using provisions
in the Act for admission of hearsay evidence.
16. 'Disclosure'
[J The Supreme COUlt of Canada in G. (J.) and W. (K.L.) has held that child
protection proceedings are to be conducted 'in accordance with the principles of
fundamental justice' .
)
)
19
) o The rules for disclosure enunciated in R. v. Stinchcombe 1 apply to child
protection proceedings, with any necessary modifications 8
D The agency must provide full and timely disclosure of alll'elevant information in
the possession of the Department, subject to non-disclosure of the identity of
referrals and of information 'that may potentially harm a child's physical, mental
or emotional health to a degree that such harm outweighs the entitlement of his or
her parents to disclosure.'
CJ Any information that the agency is not disclosing for privilege must be identified
with sufficient precision to enable the parent to apply for an order of disclosure.
a The agency is also expected to withhold information where disclosure would
interfere with a police investigation or prosecution.
o The agency is obligated to obtain and disclose material relevant to the case which
) is in the possession of other agencies or professionals which the agency is able to
obtain access to, such as police reports.
o In child protection proceedings in Saskatchewan, legal counsel for each party is
typically provided with the affidavit and court summary, as well as any relevant
assessments completed on the child or the parent, copies of the registrations of
live birth and proof of service of the notice of protection hearing. Relevant
medical reports may be exhibited to the affidavit.
o Disclosure of the affidavit and court summary are generally available before the
first appearance in Chambers.
, [1995) 1 S.C.R. 754 8 [S.D.K. v. Alberta [2002] A.J. 70 (A1ta.Q.B.).
)
20
o All of the documents disclosed by the agency are provided to legal counsel on
trust conditions that will prevent further dissemination of the information, or use
of the information for a purpose other than the child protection proceeding.
D These trust conditions are meant to provide protection to the parent and child, and
done in recognition of the highly personal information contained in the affidavit
and court summary.
o Should legal counsel request copies of the caseworker's notes, third party
information and the identity of referral sources who have requested confidentiality
must be removed from disclosure. These documents will always be provided well
before the matter proceeds to trial, but requests in the intial stages of the
proceeding can cause a delay in the proceedings.
[J Where a parent is unrepresented, the parent is asked to attend at the agency's
office to read through the affidavit and court summary. Alternatively, the agency
will seek to have the trust conditions imposed by the court to prevent abuse of the
information.
17. 'Confidentiality'
[J section 73 in The Child and Family Services Act specifies that an officer is not
compellable, and section 74 provides that officers shall maintain confidentiality
and disclose information only where required to carry out the intent of the Act or
in enumerated instances.
[J Child protection records contain highly personal and sensitive information.
)
)
)
21
[J For effective services to be provided, clients must be free to be candid and open
with their family services worker. The legislated provisions in this Act recognize
these privacy rights and the need to preserve the therapeutic relationship between
social worker and client.
a Typically. child protection information will not be shared with parties in a
custody or access proceeding unless an apprehension of a child would be
imminent should one of the parents be awarded custody. In these situations. the
agency will generally prepare an affidavit of the social worker detailing the
protection concerns.
18. 'Orders'
o Service orders are granted under section 77 of the Act.
Q Interim orders are authorized by section 35 of the Act
o Orders of disposition are granted under section 370f the Act.
o In determining disposition, the court may order a child returned to or placed in the
custody of a parent. with or without supervision or conditions attached.
o If placement with a parent is not in the child's best interests, and a person of
sufficient interest is prepared to assume custody of the child, this order can be
granted, either for a limited time or indefinitely.
o The new amendments to the legislation will now allow placement with a person
of sufficient interest to be for a time period not exceeding six months, or until the
child attains the age of 18 years. The indefinite person of sufficient interest order
will no longer be available. ,
'\ )
22
o It is only where there is no possibility of a parental or family placement, that the
court shall consider placement of the child in the Minister's care.
D Disposition orders placing the child in the Minister's care shall be for a period not
exceeding six months. Where a short-term wardship is not deemed to be
sufficient time for the parent to address the protection concerns, the legislation
requires that a permanent order be made. A permanent order allows adoption
planning to occur if appropriate.
D It is only where the child is not eligible to he placed for adoption by reason of age
or other circumstances that the court may order the child to be placed under
longterm wardship [to the age of 18 years],
19. 'protective intervention orders'
a In addition to the disposition orders, section 16 of the Act allows the court to grant
a protective intervention order to restrict contact between the child and any
individual where such contact would place the child at risk of harm,
a Protective intervention orders may be granted for duration of up to six months,
and breach of the order is a summary conviction offence.
20. 'Termination and variation of orders'
a Section 39 of the Act specifies the procedures to be followed to vary or terminate
the disposition order.
a The agency typically strives to reunify family, even where a longterm wardship
has been granted.
)
)
23
o It is not uncommon for applications to be brought by the agency, returning the
child to parental care.
o These applications can also be brought by the parent or another party to the
original proceeding.
a The test in the legislation is twofold: there must be a change of circumstances and
it must be in the best interests of the child to vary Of terminate the order
o It is only where a child has been placed permanently in the custody of the
Minister and adopted, or placed for the purposes of adoption, that a variation or
termination is precluded.
21. 'Consolidated proceedings'
o section 12 of The Children's Law Act, 1997 provides that a custody application
) filed after a protection hearing has commenced will legislatively stay the child
protection hearing. unless otherwise ordered.
Q The Minister is not to be named as a party to the custody proceeding, but is to be
served with notice of the application. The Minister may then apply to be joined as
a patty.
o Section 12 of The Children' s Law Act, 1997 also allows for the Miriister to seek to
have the custody and child protection matters consolidated.
o Consolidation will occur when officers have protection concerns with both
parties to the custody proceeding.
, ) ,
24
ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF RESOLUTION
The cases traditionally seen to 'profoundly affect' peoples' lives and involve disintegrated relationships are those based in the family. Courts are often hampered in responding to family-based disputes by the traditional adversarial system of adjudication which is largely ill-equipped to address the intertwined legal and emotional content inherent in family disputes. Adjudicative responses, characterized by inflexibility, lengthy delays, high costs, cumbersome paperwork, damaging affidavits, few educational resources and lack of early judicial intervention, have been identified as contributing factors to a ponderous system that often exacerbates a family breakdown and limits access to justice. Clearly, it is not in the best interests of children when there is unwarranted and endemic systemic delay and inflexibility. 9
Current practice in child protection proceedings is focusing on alternative
methods to trial for resolving disputes. Much has been written on the devastating effects
of trial: the expense of protracted litigation, the necessary delay in decision making, and
perhaps the most critical, the negative impact adversarial proceedings have on the
relationship between the parent and family, agency and community supports. All too
often, trials have adversely affected the ability of the parties to work cooperatively
towards reintegration of the child to parental care by breaking down these supportive
relationships and dismantling trust.
Non adversarial methods of dispute resolution have proven to be more
expeditious and efficient than traditional litigation in resolving child protection disputes.
Various models of ADR have proven more effective in encouraging swift compliance
with case plans that will help parents address the protection concerns. The resolutions
achieved appear to be not only better and longer lasting, but the family support networks
9 The Honourable Judge Nancy A. Flatters, in 'Judicial Dispute Resolution: Family and Child Related Settlement Conferences", Draft for the National Judicial Institute, 2002.
)
)
25
tend to he strengthened through professionals and others hearing first-hand from parents
and family members.
Pretrial or judicial settlement conferencing is available through the Court of
Queen's Bench and in some cases, through the Provincial Court of Saskatchewan. The
Child and Family Services Act also expressly allows for mediation services to he offered
for the purpose of obtaining assistance in concluding an agreement for the provision of
family services [section 15]. Case conferencing is now formally recognized in the
amendments, and these conferences are very effective at resolving disputes by
encouraging the participation of extended family and community members in decision
making for the child.
With some First Nation and Metis families, circles are held to provide culturally
based opportunities for members of the child's immediate and extended family, friends
) and community to be involved in the decision making process. Participation at a circle is
voluntary, and typically, the agency will arrange a facilitator for the circle. The
facilitator may meet privately with the parent in advance to help identify supports who
could attend. Professionals involved with the family may also be invited, as well as
representatives of the First Nation Child and Family Services Agency, the Band and
Elders from the community. In some instances, the child will also attend the circle,
depending of course on circumstances, age and maturity.
In June, 2003, one child protection application in Saskatoon lO was adjourned by
the court to enable the parties to proceed in a community setting in the presence of
Elders. At this Opikinawasowin, the issues were discussed in a nonMconfrontational
manner and the Elders made recommendations for disposition ultimately accepted by the
, ) ,
26
agency. the parents and the court. A copy of the decision of the Honourable Madam
Justice M.E.R. Wright creating the Opikinawasowin is included in the materials,
Collaborative law, and principles of interest based negotiations, can also be
modified to provide alternatives to trial, and the legislation has sufficient flexibility to
enable other alternative methods of dispute resolution to occur. In some regions, family
review panels have been developed, allowing the parties to proceed before community
members [section 40]. In the past two years, no applications have proceeded to trial in
Saskatoon.
AMENDMENTS TO THE CHIW AND FAMILY SERVICES ACT
In June 2001, the Department of Community Resources and Employment
announced a multi year plan to redesign child welfare services in Saskatchewan, to
highlight the pdmacy of family, community involvement and ownership, and the
government's role as a parent. In June 2002, The Children's Services Model was
introduced, which supported the introduction of kinship care as a placement priority.
In June, 2003, amendments to The Child and Family Services Act were passed by
the legislature to provide a framework for kinship care. These amendments are expected
to be proclaimed shortly.
The amendments essentially legislate the positive practices that have evolved in
child protection proceedings, and strengthen the capacity of the agency to provide
services for family preservation. Specifically, the amendments:
10 J,D. (Re) [2003] S.J. No. 453, (Sask.Q.B.)
)
)
27
• adopt the same definition of custody prescribed in The Children's Law Act, 1997.
) This will clarify that children placed in the custody of a person of sufficient
interest under section 37 are not wards of the Minister;
• legislate the priority of placement in section 37 - in particular, require the court to
first consider placement of the child with the parent, then a person of sufficient
interest, and lastly, wardship.
• Require placement with the person of sufficient interest or the Minister to be for a
time period less than six months. If placement with the person of sufficient
interest requires supervision, this too shall be for a period of less than six months.
• If a short term placement with a person of sufficient interest or a short term
placement of the child in the custody of the Minister is not appropriate, the
amendments require the court to consider granting custody to the person of
) sufficient interest until the child attains the age of 18 years;
• The amendments do not change the requirement for the court to grant a permanent
wardship of the child where placement with a parent, custody to a person of
sufficient interest, and a short term wardship are all deemed inappropriate. The
court may only proceed with a longterm wardship where the child is not eligible
to be placed for adoption, by reason of age or other circumstance.
• The requirement of a homestudy being completed for persons of sufficient interest
has been legislated, and the court shall order that a study of the home be filed with
the court indiCating that the proposed home is safe and adequate for the child.
• Case conferencing (informal group sessions involving those who have a
significant interest in planning for the child) are to be convened where the officer
, ) ,
28
believes it to be practicable. These conferences are to include the parent and any
persons whom the officer believes have an interest in the child's well being for
the purpose of planning for the child's well being.
• Finally, the amendments enable the agency to provide supportive services for
placement of children in kinship care.
The most critical effect of the amendments may be empowerment of the agency to
offer family services to members of the child's extended fa.mily. This will enable
children to be adequately cared for outside of wardship. The amendments direct that the
order of priority shall be family preservation, kinship care and state care as a last resort,
The amendments to The Child and Family Services Act are likely to encourage more
agreements for the provision of family services, and reduce the number of child
protection applications proceeding through the court system. Most importantly, however,
the changes in the legislation will ensure the safety and wellbeing of children in kinship
care.
)
)
Case Name:
J.D. (Re)
IN THE MATTER OF a hearing under The Child and Family Services Act
AND IN THE MA TIER OF J.D., born May 21,1989
C.D., born March IS, 1995 R.P., born February 9, 1996 K.P., born October 12, 1998 S.P., born October 11, 1999
[2003] S.1. No. 453 2003 SKQB 309
Q.B.F.S.M. No. 12 of 2002 J.C.S.
Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench (Family Law Division)
Judicial Centre of Saskatoon M-E. Wright J.
ri1jSc 1 or ':I
) July 10, 2003. (18 paras.)
Counsel:
L. Sandstrom~Smith, for the Minister of Social Services. N. Sim, Q.C., for the mother. E. Anderson, for the father.,
-- -.
FIAT
M-E. WRIGHT J .:- On March I, 2003, live Aboriginal children ranging in age from three to 14' years were placed on apprehended status by officers acting under The Child and Family Services Act, 5.5. (1989-90), c. C-7.2. The mother is Cree and a member of Onion Lake First Nation. Many of her extended family, who have deep roots in traditional Aboriginal practices and beliefs, continue to reside on the reserve. The father is Metis with extended family, also connected to their Aboriginal culture, residing in Manitoba. The children are all registered, or eligible to be registered, as members of Onion Lake First Nation.
An application for a hearing was filed in this court on March 3, 2003. The recommendation of the officers is that the children be the subject of a six month temporary wardship during which time
\the parents would be expected to comply with certain conditions contained in a parenting assessment )completed by Dr. Brian Chartier. The father would also be required to attend and complete an
inpatient treatment program for substance abuse and a relapse prevention program.
3 No agreement could be reached between the parents and the Department of Community Kesources and Employment. They wished rather to attempt to resolve this matter in an alternative non~adversarial manner, by proceeding to an Opikinawasowin before a council of Elders, a more ) traditional and culturally sensitive fonn of dispute resolution. Accordingly, on June 10, 2003, the protection hearing in this court was adjourned and I made the following order, indicating that written reasons would follow:
1. J. and C.D. and R., K., and S.P. shall remain in the care of the Minister of Community Resources and Employment pending the adjourned date.
2, Infonnation pertaining to the protection of these children is to be presented for alternative dispute resolution at an Opikinawasowin', in a manner respectful of Aboriginal custom and tradition.
3. With the approval of R.P. and R.D., Saskatchewan Justice shall arrange for three traditional Elders from across the province to fonn a council of Elders that will preside over the Opikinawasowin, on a date and time acceptable to the Elders. At least one Elder is to be Metis, in recognition of the importance of Metis culture to the P; family, At least one Elder is to be Cree, in recognition of the importance of Cree traditions to the D. family. Although Elders from Onion Lake First Nation may be invited to attend the OpikinawasDwin, no Elder from that community shall be asked to sit on the
. council.
4. Saskatchewan Justice shall provide the three Elders fonning the council with appropriate instruction on the general legislative framework of The Child and Family Services Act. This instruction is to be a minimum of six hours in length, non case specific, and must occur before the Opikinawasowin commences.
S. Given that this is the first Opikinawasowin to be held in Saskatchewan, the Department of Community Resources and Employment shall be responsible for any costs that may reasonably be incurred by the Elders, including transportation and accommodation to attend both the instructional program and the Opikinawasowin. The Department shall also provide translators should they be necessary, and space for the Opikinawasowin.
6. The Opikinawasowin shall be held in the coqununit)', at the White Buffalo Lodge in Saskatoon, or another similar facility._
7. The Department of Community Resources and Employment and legal counsel for R.D. and R.P., shan compile a list of proposed participants at the Opikinawasowin. This list shall be given in advance to the council of Elders for their approval. The Department shall then be responsible for requesting the attendance of these individuals at the Opikinawasowin.
8. The Department shan be responsible for reasonable expenses requested by professionals working with the family relating to their participation at the Opikinawasowin,
)
)
)
9. Legal counsel for the Department of Community Resources and Employment shall be responsible for recording the proceedings, in a manner directed by the council of Elders. A copy of this record, once acknowledged to be accurate by legal counsel for H.D. and legal counsel for R.P., is to be provided to the council of Elders.
10. Legal counsel for the Department of Community Resources and Employment shall be responsible for providing the council of Elders with a copy of the affidavit of assistant supervisor, Mary Arcand, and any other relevant documents that the council requests which are in the possession of the Department.
II.· H.D. and R.P. shall be provided with an opportunity to respond to the social worker's affidavit, either oral1y or through affidavit, and this infonnation shall be given to the council of Elders, at the Opikinawasowin.
12. The Elders shall preside over the Opikinawasowin. and direct the proceedings, including the manner of participation by attendees. The Elders may request opening and closing prayers, purification processes or the inclusion of any other rituals consistent with traditional customs, in any manner that they deem appropriate.
13. The Elders shall pennit legal counsel for the Department and for the parents to be present throughout the Opikinawasowin. other than during deliberations by the counci1 alone.
14. The Opikinawasowin shall last as long as the council of Elders deems necessary, but it shall be concluded on or before July 3, 2003 at 5 p.m.
15. Within 7 days from conclusion of the OpikinawasQwin, the council of Elders shall sUbm'it written recommendations to the Court of Queen's Bench, Family Law Division, regarding their recommendations for J. and C.D., and K., R. and S.P. These recommendations shall be accompanied by written reasons that support the recommendation, including a complete list of individuals who participated in the Opikinawasowin. Alternatively, with the approval of the Court, one or more Elders shall appear in Chambers and provide this infonnation orally.
16. The Opikinawasowin does not preclude the parties from seeking leave to file any additional infornlation with the Court of Queen's Bench (Family Law Division) follo,wing completion of the Opikinawasowin, and before further order of the Court.
17. At all times, the information presented at the Opikillawasowin is to remain confidential and may not be released by any person except where necessary for the purposes of planning for the children.
18. H.D. and R.P. shall provided their written consent, if necessary, to the release of any infomlation that the council of Elders requests.
Page 3 of9
J.V. (Ke)
19. The recommendation from the Opikinawasowin shall be given careful judicial deference, however, it is subject to the residual jurisdiction of the Court of Queenls Bench, and the parties may appeal any order to the Court of Appeal, subject to the provisions in The Child and Family Services Act.
4 There are five issues which arise out of the foregoing order. These are:
1. What is an uOpikinawasowin"?
2. Is there a role for an Opikinawasowin within the context of a proceeding taken pursuant to the provisions of The Child and Family Services Act?
3. Does this court have the authority to order an Opikinawasowin?
4. What are the requirements ofa successful Opikinawasowin?
5. Is it in the best interests of these· five children that an Opikinawasowin be held?
I will discuss each issue in order.
1. What is an "Opikinawasowin"?
Page 4 of9
5 "Opikinawasowin" is a Cree word, which literally translated, means "the lifting up of the children" or !lholding the children in high esteem" and is the name given by a Metis Elder and pipe carrier to a traditional method of dispute resolution. An Opikinawasowin requires the family, the extended family and others from the community to appear before a council of Elders, often three in number, who are regarded within their community as the "guardians of the society's history and the repository of its collective wisdom". (See: Jackson, M. "In Search of the Pathways to Justice: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Aboriginal Communities". (1992) U.B.C. L. Rev. 147 - 238. at para. 106).
6 The Elders hear from the participants. professionals working with the family. and perhaps the Children themselves, in a non·adversarial forum and with a view to appropriately resolving the dispute between the family and in this case, the Department of Community Resources and Employment. Ancillary disputes between the child's family and community members, that are known to impact upon the child. may also be addressed by the. OpikiQawasowin. It is the Elders who maintain control over the nature of the dispute resolution process and who make recommendations should no consensus be reached, blending their role of both mediator and adjudicator.
7 The flexible fonnat and reduced formality of the Opikinawasowin provides the Elders with the opportunity to craft a process responsive to the needs ofthe individual parties, including the children. Participants who may be intimidated by the adversariaI atmosphere of the court may engage in the process more fully under the guidance of the Elders enabling a full canvassing of the concerns and proposed care arrangements.
)
2. Is there a role for an Opikinawasowin within the context of a proceeding taken pursuant to the ) provisions of The Child and Family Services Act?
)
t'age" 01"9
8 The adversarial process in child protection matters has the potential to polarize the parties and their respective positions, break down communications, and create hostility between the primary participants - the parents and the chi1d protection agency. Conversely, alternative dispute resolution processes have the potential to bring together those participants in a non-adversarial and problem solving setting. (See: Edwards, L. & Baron, S. (1995), "Alternatives to Contested Litigation and Child Abuse and Neglect Cases", Family and Conciliation Courts Review (1995) 33, 275).
9 The use of alternative dispute resolution in child protection proceedings, particularly in the fonn of negotiation and mediation, is expressly recognized in The Child and Family Services Act, supra. Infonnal case conferencing with families, not presently legislatively mandated, is' being fonnalized by virtue of the proposed amendment to s. 14 of The Child and Family Services Amendment Act, 2003, Bill 3 of 2003, which upon proclamation, will include a new provision in s. 14(1)(c):
14(1) Where, on investigation, an officer concludes that a child is In need of protection, the officer shall:
(a) notify the parent in writing of the officer's conclusion;
(b) offer family services to the parent; and
(c) if the officer considers it to be practicable, convene or cause to be convened a conference with the parent and any other persons who, in the opinion of the officer, have an interest in the child's well-being for the purpose of planning for the child's well-being.
10 Mediation is recognized in s, 15(1) of the Act, supra, which pennits the parties. in advance of an application to the court for a hearing, to submit the officer's reasons for concluding that a child is in need of protection to a mediator for the purpose of obtaining assistance in concluding an agreement. Mediation may also be utilized after the hearing has been commenced whether through the Dispute Resolution Office of the Department of Justice, enlistment of a private mediator, or in appropriate circumstances, by virtue of a talking circle. In those proceedings taken in this court, the pretrial settlement conference is a latter stage fonn of dispute resolution, employing both negotiation and lJlediation, to assist the parties in achieving agreement rather than proceeding to trial.
II An Opikinawasowin' pennits families yet another opportunity to resolve their dispute with the Department of Community Resources and Emplo)111ent utilizing a hybrid of alternative methods including negotiation. mediation and adjudication. while ensuring that the court maintains its supervisory jurisdiction to ensure that the outcome complies with the legislation and is in the best interests of the child. Broad participation by the family, professionals working with the family, extended family and the community. under the control and direction of a council of Elders. is consistent with the concept of restorative justice embraced in the criminal justice system in Aboriginal communities. It has the potential to address child protection concerns in a manner more
) responsive to the needs of the large number of Aboriginal families appearing in this court together with the possibility that the outcome will be more effective and legitimate to those most directly affected. The children involved can only benefit from a resolution that is both non-adversarial and
Page60f9
more culturally significant.
12 I have concluded that the holding of an Opikinawasowin does have a role to play within the ) context of a proceeding taken under The Child and Family Services Act, supra. It is consistent with the alternative dispute resolution methods already recognized by the legislation and does not oust the jurisdiction of this court to ensure that any outcome is consistent both with that legislation and with the best interests of the child.
3. Does this court have the authority to order an Opikinawasowin?
13 Sections 4,34 and 35 of The Child and Family Services Act, supra, provide:
4 Where a person or court is required by any provision of this Act other than subsection 49(2) to detennine the best interests of a child, the person or court shall take into account:
(a) the quality of the relationships that the child has with any person who may have a close connection with the child;
(h) the child's physical, mental and emotional level of development;
(c) the child's emotional, cultural, physical, psychological and spiritual needs;
(d) the home environment proposed to be provided for the child;
(e) the plans for the care of the child of the person to whom it is proposed that the custody ofthe child be entrusted;
(1) where practicable, the child's wishes, having regard to the age and level Qfthe child's development;
(g) the importance of continuity in the child's care and the possible effect on the child of disruption of that continuity; and
(h) the effect on the child of a delay in making a decision.
34(1) Subject to section 33 and subsection (2), the court may adjourn a protection hearing from time to time.
(2) Before adjourning a protection hearing, the court shall consider the best interests of the child and, in particular:
(a) the importance of continuity in the child's care and the possible effect of disruption of that continuity; and
(b) the effect on the child of a delay in making a decision.
)
)
35(1) Where the court adjourns a protection hearing pursuant to subsection 34(1), the court may make an interim order that the child:
(a) remain with or be returned to his or her parent;
(b) remain with, or be placed in the care of, a person having a sufficient interest in the child; or
(c) remain or be placed in the care of the minister.
(2)- In making an interim order pursuant to subsection (1), the court:
(a) shall consider the best interests of the child; and
(b) may make the order subject to any tenns and conditions, including access to the child by the parent or a person designated pursuant to section 23, that the court considers appropriate.
rage I at 9
14 Pursuant to s. 34, the court has the discretion to adjourn a protection hearing from time to time, provided that it does not delay the proceeding beyond the time limits prescribed in s. 33 and further provided that the adjournment does not adversely impact upon the best interests of the child. Section 35 then permits the court to make an interim order placing the child either with his or her
.) parent, a person of sufficient interest, or the minister, upon any tenns and conditions that the court considers appropriate, again having regard to the best interests afthe child.
)
15 Adjournments- have in the past been granted for numerous reasons, including to pennit the assessment of a parent or a child; for counselling to occur; for a parent to attend treatmenti for horne studies to be prepared; and for talking circles to occur. There is no reason that would preclude the hearing from also being adjourned to pennit a non-adversarial dispute mechanism such as the Opikinawasowin to proceed provided that the adjoununent does not impact unduly on the best interests of the child; that it does not delay the proceeding beyond the time limits prescribed in the Act; and that during the interim, there is an order respecting the placement of the child.
4. What are the requirements of a successful Opikinawasowin?
16 This is the first Opikinawasowin to be directed by this court. As such the requirements to ensure optimum success for its participants, operating within the legislative framework ofIhe Child and Family Services Act, supra, may very well evolve over time. However, even at this early stage, there are certain requirements that appear to be fundamental. These include:
1. There should be a consensus and a willingness on the part of all parties to proceed to an Opikinawasowin.
2. The Opikinawasowin should be held in the community, outside of any adversarial arena. It must be in an environment that is comfortable, accessible to the participants, and which is amenable to the use by the Elders of ceremonial rites, sacred ceremonies of purification, and any other rituals consistent with traditional customs.
3. The Elders must have the power to preside over the Opikinawasowin and the ability to direct the proceedings, including the manner of participation by the attendees.
4. The Elders must also have the power to compel full disclosure of information that they consider necessary. The parties must accordingly consent to the release of infonnation to the Elders.
S. Evidence filed in the child protection proceeding, including the affidavits of the officers and the parents, should be provided to the Elders.
6. The privacy rights of the parents must also be respected. Accordingly, release of information to the Elders must be conditional upon those privacy rights being upheld both during the dispute resolution process and aftcJ"'I..Vard.
7. The Opikinawasowin must not conflict with the role that the court is required to play in child protection proceedings. The Elders must be provided with information and be knowledgeable of the framework provided by The Child and Family Services Act. The recommendations made by them for resolution must fall within that framework.
8. Legal counsel for the parties must be able to attend, other than during deliberations by the council of Elders.
9. A time frame for the conclusion of the Opikinawasowin should be imposed taking into consideration the time limits prescribed by the legislation and the impact that delay may have on the best interests ofthe children.
10. Upon the conclusion of the Opikinawasowin, the council of Elders should submit to the court their recommendations and the reasons for their recommendations. together with a list of all individuals who participated.
11. When the recommendations of the council of Elders has been received by the court, the parties must have the right, if desired.. to submit additional infonnation to the court before any order is made.
12. The court must retain its jurisdiction and supervisory capacity to ensure that the outcome of the Opikinawasowin complies with the legislation and is in the best interests of the children.
5. Is it in the best interests of these five children that an Opikinawasowin be held?
17 I have concluded that an Opikinawasowin is in the best interests of the children, having regard to the factors enumerated in s. 4 of The Child and Family Services Act, supra. The children are
)
all members. or entitled to be members. of Onion Lake First Nation. Their parents, and extended ) families, hold traditional Aboriginal beliefs and adhere to traditional practices. An Opikinawasowin
)
\ )
Page 9 of9
will provide a non-adversariaI, culturally relevant forum in which they may attempt to resolve their dispute with the Department of Community Resources and Employment. Other forms of negotiation have not been successful with this family.
18 Broad participation by family, community and professionals, under the guidance and control of the council of Elders, will hopefully achieve a result that is reflective of the children's physical, cultural and spiritual needs and at the same time one that is more acceptable to the parents and family than one imposed without such a degree of participation. This can only serve to increase the possibility for long tenn success and the ultimate goal of family reunification. Any negative impact occasioned by delay can be minimized by the imposition of a time frame. If successful, and the recommendations of the Opikinawasowin accepted by the court, the time involved in concluding the proceeding will be significantly less than if the matter were to proceed to trial. providing a further benefit to both the children and their parents.
M-E. WRlGHT J.
QL UPDATE: 20030717 cp/cile/nc/qw/qlebh
)
)
)
I
The Child and Family Services Act Procedural Flow Chart
Duty to report child abuse
Section 12
I Duty on
officer to investigate
Section 13
Unsubstantiated Child in Need of Protection
Section II
• Case conference Duty to offer Apprehension • Kinship care Family Services
Section 14 Section 17
Accepted and Application for a Voluntary Agreement Protection Hearing
reached
I Parent and
other parties served with
notice
I Documents
disclosed on trust conditions
I Chambers
. Order Pretrial Withdrawat
ifagreement reached
iTrL
'--