|
|
MNAASGED Report a Child In Need of Protection
Duty to Report Under the CFSA
 The CFSA recognizes that every citizen has a responsibility for the welfare of children. It
states clearly that members of the public; including professionals who work with
children, have an obligation to report forthwith, to a Children's Aid Society if they have
"reasonable grounds' to suspect that a child is or may be in need of protection. Where a
child is suspected to be in need of protection, professionals who work with children must
report even if it involves confidential information. In regards to confidentiality, the CFSA
supersedes all other common laws or statutory privileges (except for the solicitor-client
relationship).
For purposes of child protection under the C.F.S.A., a child is a person who is under
sixteen years of age. Youth who are sixteen years of age or older but under age eighteen
are included only if they are currently the subject of an order under Part 3 of the CFSA
( a ward or under a Supervision Order).
- The person who has the reasonable grounds to suspect a child is or may be in need
of protection must make the report directly to a Children's Aid Society and not
rely on anyone else to report on his or her behalf. This allows the Protection
worker to gather pertinent details of the allegations from the first hand observer
and prevent any unnecessary delay on the commencement of the investigation
- There is also an ongoing obligation to report. If a person has made a previous
report about a child, and has additional reasonable grounds to suspect that child is
or may be in need of protection, that person must make a further report to a
Children's Aid Society. This ensures that critical information subsequent to the
initial referral is not overlooked in any decisions made in relation to the safety and
well being of the child. It is often assumed that CAS is aware of this secondary
information by virtue of their involvement with the family. Results of several
inquests into the deaths of children reveal that this is not always the case.
- Protection from liability (Section 72-7) is built into the CFSA for those persons
who make a report unless he or she acted maliciously or without reasonable
grounds for his or her suspicion. It should be noted that, if a professional fairs in
their duty to report, a civil suit could be launched by the victim at some point in
the future if subsequent abuse or neglect arises as a result of the failure to report.
- Under Section 72(4) of the CFSA, any professional or official who fails to report
a suspicion that a child is or may be in need of protection, where the information
on which that suspicion is based was obtained in the course of his or her
professional or official duties, is liable on conviction to a fine up to $1, 000.
- It is not the role of any professional, other than the Police and the CAS worker, to
conduct the investigation. As soon as a professional has reasonable and probable
grounds to believe that a child may be in need of protection, there are adequate
grounds to refer to the CAS. Additional probing or questioning of the child will
only serve to compromise the ensuing investigative process.
- "Reasonable Grounds" have been interpreted to mean what an average person,
given his or her training, background and experience, exercising normal and
honest judgement would have reason to suspect. CAS's can be contacted
whenever the referral person is unclear whether their concerns would meet the
threshold for an investigation. Non-identifying information can be given but oncethe situation meets the threshold for investigation, the referral source is obligated
to give the relevant identifying information.
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
The Child and Family Services Act R.S.O. 1990, CHAPTER C.ll identifies the
following occasions where a prescribed method of ADR must be considered and/or
may be used:
• If a child is or may be in need of protection, a children's aid society must
consider whether a prescribed method of ADR could assist in resolving any
issue related to the child or a plan for the child's care (section 20.2 (1)).
• The court, at any time during a proceeding, and with the consent of the
parties, may adjourn the proceeding to permit the parties to utilize a
prescribed method of ADR to attempt to resolve the issues in dispute (section
51.1).
• On applications to vary or terminate an openness order before or after an
adoption, the court may, with the consent of the parties, adjourn the
proceeding to permit the parties to utilize a prescribed method of ADR to
attempt to resolve any disputes related to the proceeding (sections 145.2(7)
and 153.1(10)).
Examples may include but are not limited to the following Alternative Dispute
Resolution Mechanisms:
A. Child Protection Mediation
A process where child protection workers and the family (including the child were
appropriate) and any other person wishing to participate in a plan for the child, work
together with the aid of a trained and impartial child protection mediator who has no
decision making power. The mediator assists the participants in reaching an agreement on
the issues in dispute, in generating options for resolving their dispute and in developing a
mutually acceptable plan that addresses the protection concerns identified.
B. Family Group Conferencing
A process that brings together the family (including the child where appropriate), the
child's extended family and community, child protection workers, and service providers
to develop a plan that addresses the protection concerns identified. A trained and
impartial coordinator, with no decision making power, assists the participants throughout
the process. An integral component of family group conferencing is providing the
extended family group with an opportunity to meet privately, independently of
professionals, to develop this plan.
C. Aboriginal Approaches
Traditional methods of dispute resolution, including circle processes, have been
established by First Nations communities or Aboriginal organizations. Impartial
facilitators who have no decision-making power and who are skilled in First Nation
traditional methods assists the participants in developing a plan that is supported by the
participants and/or the First Nation community and addresses the protection concerns
identified.
The ultimate goal of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is to reduce delays in child
welfare proceedings and reduce the volume of child welfare cases that go to trial.
Streamlining court processes and using alternatives to court contribution to the best
interests of children who are or may be in need of protection.
- Resolving cases outside of the courtroom through prescribed methods of ADR
will result in a less costly and more prompt approach that encourages
collaboration and cooperation with families
- By reducing the volume of child welfare cases that go to trial, agencies will be
able to divert resources to support families in other ways
- The legislation provides two alternatives to lengthy court proceedings:
- Settle cases using a prescribed ADR process prior to initiating court proceedings,
or at any point during litigation
- Grant care and custody to individuals who propose a permanent placement for a
child and who are determined to be capable of providing sufficient care for the
child
Outcomes for the changes to court processes and inclusion of Alternative Dispute
Mechanisms:
- More timely resolution of child welfare cases
- Greater investment by family members in efforts to achieve case objectives
- Higher settlement rates
- Greater levels of satisfaction with better outcomes for children and families
- Reinforcement of the family's capacity to kept children happy, healthy and safe
- Better communication and more effective engagement with families
- Increased cost effectiveness
|
|