Harmful Impacts: the Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection Report of the Motherisk Commission the Honourable Judith C
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection Report of the Motherisk Commission The Honourable Judith C. Beaman Commissioner February 2018 This Report is available at Motherisk Commission (https://motheriskcommission.ca). © 2018 Ministry of the Attorney General ISBN 978-1-4868-1372-8. Print. [English]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1378-0. Print. [Cree]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1373-5. PDF. [English]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1379-7. PDF. [Cree]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1374-2. Print. [French]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1380-3. Print. [Oji-Cree]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1375-9. PDF. [French]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1381-0. PDF. [Oji-Cree]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1376-6. Print. [Mohawk]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1382-7. Print. [Ojibway]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1377-3. PDF. [Mohawk]. ISBN 978-1-4868-1383-4. PDF. [Ojibway]. |2| Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection Report of the Motherisk Commission To recognize the broad harm caused by the unreliable Motherisk hair testing, the Commission considered “affected persons” to include children, siblings, biological parents, adoptive parents, foster parents, extended families, and the bands or communities of Indigenous children. This Report is dedicated to everyone who was affected by the testing. February 26, 2018 The Honourable Yasir Naqvi Attorney General of Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General McMurtry-Scott Building 720 Bay Street, 11th Floor Toronto, ON M7A 2S9 Re: Motherisk Commission Dear Minister: With this letter, I am delivering the Report of the Motherisk Commission, Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection. Establishing the Motherisk Commission served as public acknowledgement that the unreliable hair testing by the Motherisk Drug Testing Laboratory deeply affected Ontario families. It is my sincere hope that the services and support the Commission offered have provided some measure of relief to the families who were affected. In this Report, with the input of many partners, I make a number of recommendations to help ensure that no other family experiences similar harm in the future. It has been a privilege to serve as the Commissioner. I appreciate the support for the Commission from your Ministry and the Ministry of Children and Youth Services. Yours very truly, Judith C. Beaman Commissioner 400 Avenue University 400 University Avenue Bureau 1800A Suite 1800A Toronto (Ontario) M7A 2R9 Toronto, Ontario M7A 2R9 [email protected] [email protected] www.motheriskcommission.ca/fr www.motheriskcommission.ca/en Report of the Motherisk Commission Contents Contents .......................................................................................................................................... i Acronyms and short forms in this Report ................................................................................ iv Note regarding child welfare legislation .................................................................................. iv Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ v Connecting with people and communities ................................................................................ v Reviewing cases and offering services .....................................................................................vii Identifying and addressing systemic issues .............................................................................. ix Summary of Recommendations .............................................................................................. xiii Introduction ................................................................................................................................. xix PART 1: Establishing the Commission and Reaching Out ..................................... 1 1. Background to the Establishment of the Commission .............................................................. 3 The Motherisk Drug Testing Laboratory .................................................................................... 3 The case of R v Broomfield ........................................................................................................ 3 The Independent Review ........................................................................................................... 4 2. Mandate and Principles ............................................................................................................. 9 Mandate of the Commission ..................................................................................................... 9 Definition of “affected persons” ............................................................................................. 11 Fundamental principles ........................................................................................................... 12 Confidentiality ......................................................................................................................... 14 Establishing the Motherisk Commission team ........................................................................ 15 3. Information, Outreach and Communications .......................................................................... 17 Providing information and inviting input ................................................................................ 17 Outreach focus and challenges ............................................................................................... 19 Communications ...................................................................................................................... 21 PART 2: Reviewing Cases and Offering Services ................................................ 23 4. Background to Child Protection in Ontario .............................................................................. 25 The Child and Family Services Act ........................................................................................... 26 The child protection process ................................................................................................... 28 Family Law Rules ..................................................................................................................... 31 Evidence .................................................................................................................................. 31 The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms ....................................................................... 37 |i| Harmful Impacts: The Reliance on Hair Testing in Child Protection 5. Review of Individual Cases ....................................................................................................... 39 Information on who was tested .............................................................................................. 39 Purpose of reviewing cases ..................................................................................................... 39 Definition of “substantial impact” ........................................................................................... 40 The importance of the legal record ......................................................................................... 40 Scope of the file reviews ......................................................................................................... 41 Additional files I requested...................................................................................................... 46 The file review process ............................................................................................................ 47 Reconsideration of determinations ......................................................................................... 49 Notifications following file reviews ......................................................................................... 50 Notifying children .................................................................................................................... 51 Services offered by the Commission ....................................................................................... 53 6. Observations from the Review of Individual Cases ................................................................. 55 Circumstances related to testing ............................................................................................. 55 Observations from file reviews................................................................................................ 60 7. Legal Referrals and Remedies .................................................................................................. 67 The challenge of obtaining legal remedies .............................................................................. 67 Offering legal support .............................................................................................................. 68 Potential legal remedies .......................................................................................................... 68 8. Counselling Services ................................................................................................................. 73 The need for counselling ......................................................................................................... 73 Offering access to counselling ................................................................................................. 73 Counsellors’ views on testing and counselling .......................................................................